IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, MS. NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Attar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
(Per: Hon’ble Vivek Kumar Birla, J.)
1. Heard Shri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Aditya Prakash alongwith Shri Saurabh Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the surviving appellants, Shri Satish Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for the informant, Shri O.P. Dwivedi, learned AGA-I for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
2. Present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 02.08.1983, passed by Ist. Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in S.T. No. 73 of 1982 (State Vs. Attar Singh and Others) convicting and sentencing appellant Boondi and Khajan Singh to 18 months R.I. under section 148 of I.P.C. and sentencing the remaining appellant namely; Attar Singh, Bani Singh, Om Prakash, Nathu Singh son of Afimi, Harphool, Tej Ram, Tota Ram Chhattar, Buddha, Omi, Nathu son of Khacheru, Sarni, to one years R.I. under section 147 of Indian Penal Code and further sentencing all the appellants to life imprisonment under section 302 I.P.C. read with section 149 I.P.C. further sentencing all the appellants to undergo 5 years R.I. on each count under section 307 I.P.C. read with section 149 I.P.C. and further sentencing all the appellants to 6 month R.I.
Upendra Pradhan vs. State of Orissa
Balaka Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab
Darshan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Krishna Mochi and others vs. State of Bihar
Darya Singh vs. State of Punjab
Appabhai and another vs. State of Gujarat
State of A.P. vs. S. Rayappa and others
Pulicherla Nagaraju @ Nagaraja Reddy v. State of AP
Satbir Singh and others vs. State of U.P.
The court upheld the conviction of the surviving appellants based on reliable ocular evidence from injured witnesses, emphasizing the special status of such testimony in criminal cases.
Conviction for mass murder under 302/149 IPC set aside due to unreliable, contradictory ocular evidence from related witnesses; doubtful night identification, improbable presence/story; benefit of do....
The credibility of witness testimonies in criminal trials requires careful scrutiny, particularly when they are related to victims, and the prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Related witness testimony can be credible in criminal proceedings, and minor discrepancies do not undermine the prosecution case if the core narrative remains intact.
The testimony of injured witnesses holds significant evidentiary value and can support a conviction for murder when corroborated by medical evidence, establishing intent beyond reasonable doubt.
The court reiterated the importance of scrutinizing testimony from interested witnesses, considering the relevance of motive in establishing guilt, and disregarding minor discrepancies in witness tes....
Eyewitness testimony from injured relatives is credible and can support a conviction, provided it is consistent and corroborated by medical evidence.
Witness testimony, particularly that of injured victims, holds significant weight in criminal cases, affirming convictions despite claims of investigative defects or witness bias.
The conviction of the accused was reversed due to insufficient corroboration of eye-witness accounts and the potential for false implication stemming from previous enmity.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.