Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
J.J.MUNIR, VINAI KUMAR DWIVEDI
Seema Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction details and background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. proceedings of the case and charge framing. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. prosecution's evidence submission. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. hearing of appeals. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. motive and circumstantial evidence. (Para 14 , 15 , 20) |
| 6. murder investigation details and calls. (Para 16 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. circumstances surrounding the deaths. (Para 21 , 22 , 25) |
| 8. strangulation and cause of death discussion. (Para 33 , 36 , 39) |
| 9. alibi discussions and witness testimonies. (Para 46 , 47 , 56) |
| 10. confessions and their admissibility. (Para 63 , 64 , 68) |
| 11. conclusion and findings from various circumstances. (Para 75 , 76) |
| 12. final orders of the court. (Para 78 , 79 , 80) |
JUDGMENT :
J.J. Munir, J.
1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order of Mr. Mohd. Quamar, the then Additional Sessions Judge/ Fast Track Court No.2, Shahjahanpur dated 18.02.2020 passed in Sessions Trial No.519 of 2014, convicting the appellants for an offence punishable under Section 302/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC') and sentencing each of them to suffer imprisonment for life, besides a fine in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each; and,
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt in homicide cases, particularly when the accused fail to provide a credible explanation for events that occurred in their vicinity.
Double strangulation murder on circumstantial evidence: unbroken chain (motive-honour killing via pregnancy, presence via calls, failed alibi, no S.106 explanation) rules out suicide absent contrivan....
The court affirmed the conviction of the defendants based on established evidence including eyewitness accounts and forensic links to the crime, despite challenges regarding witness reliability and p....
The court held that mere suspicion is insufficient for a conviction; a complete chain of circumstantial evidence is required to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances linking the accused to the crime. The accused has the burden of offering a cogent explanat....
(1) Section 34 IPC and 115 IPC would not go hand in hand.(2) Evidence is raw material which Judge or Adjudicator uses to reach a finding of fact – Courts can record order of conviction even in a case....
The judgment underscores that a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence must establish an unbroken chain of events leading to guilt, with comprehensive corroboration against multiple hypot....
In criminal cases, consistent and credible evidence is essential; discrepancies and reliance on related witnesses can undermine the prosecution's case and result in acquittal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the shift of burden under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to the accused to explain facts within his knowledge, and the accused's obli....
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
