Back
BRIJ RAJ SINGH, SIDDHARTH
Mahmood Ali – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Brij Raj Singh, J.)
1. The present appeal has been filed against the common judgement and order dated 06.11.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Ghaziabad in Sessions Trial No.201 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No.444 of 2007, thereby convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 302 IPC for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/-and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year additional imprisonment and further in Sessions Trial No.189 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No.478 of 2007, under Section 25/4 Arms Act, thereby convicting and sentencing the appellant for one year imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year additional imprisonment. However, both the sentences shall run concurrently.
2. As per the prosecution case, the complainant, Raj Mohammad lodged a report mentioning therein that his maternal uncle, Mohd. Raees Ahmad S/o Rafeeq Ahmad used to live in his house and he was going to attend the Namaz on 26. 07.2007 at 5.30 AM. The accused-appellant, Mahmood Ali assaulted his maternal uncle by knife in front of Power-loom factory. His maternal uncle made
The court emphasized the necessity of credible witness accounts for conviction, finding significant contradictions and lack of independent corroboration in the prosecution's case.
Point of Law : Conviction on the basis of statements of two police officials alone is not sustainable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and contradictions and doubts in the evidence can lead to the f....
Prosecution has failed to prove charges levelled against accused persons under Sections 302/34, 201 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act by any reliable, cogent and independent evidence to hilt beyond reas....
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony and corroborative medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Mere failure of the prosecution in producing reports from the Forensic Science Laboratory relating to the weapon of offence and the blood-stained earth and clothes would not derogate from the veracit....
The prosecution must prove the charges against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and unreliable witnesses, lack of a source of light, doubts about the place of occurrence, and lapses in the invest....
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
