Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
RAJNISH KUMAR, ZAFEER AHMAD
Khushi Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Zafeer Ahmad, J.
1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the records.
2. The aforesaid criminal appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 30.10.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 3, Sitapur in Session Trial No. 745 of 2002 (State v. Khushi Ram), arising out of Case Crime No. 215 of 2002, Police Station Manpur, District Sitapur, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code,1860 (in short IPC) and sentenced to imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo an additional one year of simple imprisonment.
3. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it may be noted that this Court has been apprised, while dictating the present judgment, that the accused–appellant has already been released on remission on 26.01.2019. However, since the present appeal arises out of the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court, this Court proceeds to adjudicate upon the legality and correctness of the impugned judgment on merits.
Prosecution Stor
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for circumstantial evidence to be cogently and firmly established, forming a complete chain that rules out any reasonable likelihoo....
A conviction cannot stand when there are significant contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, raising doubts about the prosecution's case.
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....
Direct eyewitness testimony can establish guilt in murder cases, supported by physical evidence, where minor discrepancies do not diminish credibility.
The delay in recording witness statements and minor discrepancies in evidence do not necessarily undermine the credibility of the witnesses or the prosecution's case.
The court emphasized that an anti-timed FIR and inconsistent witness testimonies undermine the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Conviction under IPC 302/34 upheld on reliable sole eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence and witnesses, despite minor discrepancies and non-examination of investigating officer/docto....
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
