Back
G. S. AHLUWALIA, VISHAL MISHRA
Ashish Pathak – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ahluwalia, J. -- 1. This Criminal Appeal under section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the Judgment and Sentence dated 9.6.2010 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa in S.T. No.332/2009, by which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the following offences:
| S. No. | Conviction under section | Sentence |
| 1. | 302 of IPC | Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default 2 years R.I. |
| 2. | 201 of IPC | 2 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 500/- in default 6 months R.I. |
2. According to prosecution story, the complainant Phoolchand Saket lodged an FIR that he is a scrap dealer and deals with waste Cartoon and bottles. His hut is situated by the side of canal. On 10.7.2009, at about 7-8 p.m.., he closed his shop and went back. In the morning, at about 7:30 a.m., he came to his hut and found that near the Dhaba of Lala Pathak, lot of persons had gathered. He also went there and saw that the dead body of Lala Pathak was lying with only a shirt on the dead body. Injuries were there on head, hand and buttocks. Yesterday, i.e., 10.7.2009, the appellant was drinking liquor with the deceased. It appears that somebody has killed Lal
Prosecution must prove the entire chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt, failing which conviction cannot be sustained.
Murder and disappearance of evidence – Whenever any doubt emanates in mind of Court, benefit shall accrue to accused and not prosecution – Conviction only on the basis of last seen together cannot be....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the 'last seen together theory' and the reliance on circumstantial evidence, medical evidence, and recovery evidence to establis....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, especially when relying on circumstantial evidence, which requires stringent adherence to established evidentiary standards....
In a murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence, multiple corroborative factors, including the last seen theory and absence of alternative explanations, can establish guilt beyond reasonable ....
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence and the last seen theory in establishing the guilt of the accused.
Circumstantial evidence alone, especially the last seen theory without corroboration, is insufficient for conviction; guilt must be established beyond reasonable doubt.
The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, requiring all circumstantial evidence to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
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
