Back
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
BISWAJIT PALIT
Bibhishan Ghosh, S/o. Lt. Sushil Ch. Ghosh, @ Lt. Sushil Kumar Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
BISWAJIT PALIT, J.
This appeal is preferred challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.01.2024 delivered by Learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in connection with case No.S.T.36(Type-I) of 2021. By the said judgment Learned Trial Court has sentenced the convict to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for commission of offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC, in default to suffer further S.I. for six months. It was further ordered that if fine money is realized the same be handed over to the victim as compensation.
2. Heard Learned Counsel, Mr. Ratan Datta appearing for the appellant-accused and also heard Learned P.P., Mr. Raju Datta along with Learned Addl. P.P., Mr. R. Saha appearing on behalf the State-respondent.
3. In course of hearing, Learned Counsel for the appellant-accused first of all drawn the attention of this Court that in this case, no charge was framed under Section 354 of IPC by the Learned Trial Court against the appellant although after the completion of trial, Learned Trial Court found the appellant to be guilty under Section 354 of IPC and convicted him accordingly. Learned Counsel further subm
The prosecution must prove the elements of 'criminal force' or 'assault' to sustain a conviction under Section 354 IPC, which was not established in this case.
The court affirmed conviction under Sections 448 and 323 of IPC, citing insufficient evidence for rape charge under Section 376, emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 354 IPC, concluding that the appellant's actions constituted an outrage of modesty, supported by the victim's testimony and corroborating evidence.
The prosecution failed to prove the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to contradictions in witness testimonies and absence of corroborating evidence.
A prosecutrix's credible testimony can be sufficient for conviction in sexual assault cases even without corroboration, provided it is reliable and consistent.
Conviction cannot be sustained based on uncorroborated and inconsistent testimony of the victim, failing to meet evidentiary standards in sexual assault cases.
The statement of a deceased victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC is not substantive evidence and cannot solely support a conviction; the prosecution must prove the victim's age and provide corrobor....
The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the conviction's reversal.
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
