Back
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA
Abrar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J. - Instant appeal arises out of the judgement and order dated 30.5.2018 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Fatehpur in S.T. No. 291 of 2015 (State v. Abrar) arising out of Case Crime No.245 of 2015, under Section 3 07 IPC, Police Station Bindki, District Fatehpur as well as S.T. No.292 of 2015, under Section 3 /25 ARMS ACT , arising out of Crime No. 250 of 2015, P.S. Bindki, District - Fatehpur, convicting the appellant under Sections 3 07) IPC and Section 3 /25 of ARMS ACT and sentencing him as under:
(i) under Section 307 IPC to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment, with fine of Rs.10,000/- in default thereof he has to undergo one year additional imprisonment;
(ii) under Section 3 /25 of ARMS ACT to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/- in default thereof he has to undergo one month additional imprisonment. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
2. Heard Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Deepak Kapoor, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The factual matrix of the case in brief relevant for the present appea
The conviction for attempted murder under Section 307 IPC was upheld based on eyewitness accounts, while the charge under the Arms Act was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.
The court affirmed conviction for attempted murder while reducing the sentence due to mitigating circumstances, highlighting scrutiny of evidence in violent crime cases and the need for direct corrob....
Minor injuries do not negate culpability for attempt to commit murder; intention inferred from actions and circumstances surrounding the act.
Point of Law : Conviction on the basis of statements of two police officials alone is not sustainable.
Attempt to murder – Intention to kill must be apparent from act of accused.
Prosecution must provide corroborative evidence, especially in firearm offences; mere accusations without substantiating proof cannot sustain a conviction.
Point of Law : Obviously, enmity was existing between both the sides and some altercation is stated to have taken place which has been trid to be coloured differently by the prosecution witnesses.
Point of Law : Murder - Conviction set aside - Trial court has committed gross-error in believing the sole testimony of PW5 and conviction should not have been based on such type of testimony, which ....
The refusal of the accused to undergo TIP, the recovery of the weapon of offence, and the consistent testimony of eyewitnesses can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
