Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SIDDHARTHA VARMA, PRASHANT MISHRA-I
Khunni Lal – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prashant Mishra-I, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sikandar B Kochar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Amit Sinha, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the materials on record.
2. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred by appellant, namely, Khunni Lal, against the judgment and order dated 17.05.1989 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kannauj, Farrukhabad in Sessions Trial No. 219 of 1987, arising out of Case Crime No. 56 of 1987, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Thathiya Sub-District Kannauj, District Farrukhabad, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life, under Section 302 I.P.C.
3. As per the prosecution case, in brief, the accused persons, namely, Khunni Lal, Bhagwan Din and Jagdish belong to the family of complainant Ram Singh and they are co-sharers of half of the house and land of the complainant. Accused Khunni Lal is a Lekhpal and Bhagwan Din is an inspector in the canal department in district Kanpur. The accused persons built their house by encroaching the land of the complainant. On 09.05.1987, at around 6 PM, when the accused persons were cutting the eastern pla
Conviction cannot stand when significant doubts arise due to contradictory testimonies and acquittal of co-accused on similar evidence, emphasizing the principle of parity in criminal proceedings.
The court reaffirmed that discrepancies in minor details do not undermine the credibility of eyewitnesses in violent crimes where the prosecution has established overwhelming evidence of guilt.
The court confirmed that related eyewitnesses can provide reliable testimony in murder cases when corroborated by medical evidence, emphasizing that evidence must be assessed for credibility rather t....
Interested evidence is not necessarily unreliable and should be scrutinized with care but cannot be rejected merely on the ground of being partisan. Minor discrepancies and contradictions should not ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on eyewitness accounts and medical evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, despite any defects in the investigation.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on related witnesses without corroboration is insufficient for conviction.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on witness testimony requires corroboration, especially when witnesses are near relatives.
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
