Back
SIDDHARTH, RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA
Pramod Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Siddharth, J.
Heard Sri. Mewa Lal Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. G.N. Kanaujia, learned A.G.A.-1 for the state-respondent.
2. Present criminal appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated 13.01.1983 passed by Sessions Judge, Etawah in Sessions Trial No.267 of 1979 convicting and sentencing the appellant to imprisonment for life under Section 302 I.P.C.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 27.02.1979 at about 8.30 a.m. Ram Swaroop PW-1; Suggat Khan PW-2; Budh Lal, Ram Rai and Rajendra Kumar (deceased) were digging potatoes in the field of informant, Ram Swaroop. Accused, Ram Kumar and Anil Kumar came to the field of Ram Swaroop and abused Rajendra Kumar and caught hold of him forcibly, threw him on ground and pressed him down. The informant and others asked why they are behaving against Rajendra Kumar in such manner. In the meanwhile, Rajendra Kumar, freed himself from the clutches of Ram Kumar and Anil Kumar and ran towards the village. On road he saw the accused, Shyam Singh and Pramod Kumar (appellant) coming from village side. On the exhortation of accused Shyam Singh, accused Pramod Singh, who was carrying a rifle, shot Rajendr
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on credible eyewitness testimony and a reliable dying declaration, emphasizing the established motive of caste rivalry.
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 prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, relying primarily on credible eyewitness testimony and corroborative forensic evidence, particularly in murder convictions.
In criminal law, reasonable doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused; failure to provide timely evidence can undermine the prosecution's case.
The consistent and trustworthy testimonies of eyewitnesses, supported by medical evidence, are crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a murder case.
Eyewitness testimony, especially from injured witnesses, holds significant evidentiary value in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases.
The court established that direct eyewitness testimony is paramount in murder cases, and self-defense claims must be substantiated by credible evidence.
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
