HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD, MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PAL, JJ
SRI SALEM DEBBARMA @ SALEN DEBBARMA AND ORS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF TRIPURA – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
T. AMARNATH GOUD, J.
This present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , against the impugned Judgment of Conviction and Sentence dated 11.09.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khowai Judicial District, Khowai, Tripura, in Case No. S.T. (TYPE-1) 05 of 2018. By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge, Khowai, Tripura, convicted the appellants for committing an offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer life imprisonment. Additionally, the appellants were fined Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) each, with a default sentence of one month of simple imprisonment.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Madhabi Debbarma lodged a written ejahar with the Officer-in-Charge, Champahaur Police Station, alleging that on 14.02.2017, at about 10:00/10:30 hours, her husband, Samir Debbarma, was attacked indiscriminately with a ‘dao' by the appellants while he was returning from a marriage ceremony. Upon hearing his cries, the informant and others rushed to the spot and found him with bleeding injuries. When the informant questioned the appell
Balwan Singh Vs. State of Haryana
Syed Ibrahim Vs. State of A.P.
Ravinder Singh alias Kaku Vs. State of Punjab
Eyewitness testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient for conviction in murder cases, even with minor discrepancies.
(1) Kidnapping, murder, conspiracy and disappearance of evidence – Brutality of offence does not dispense with legal requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Courts can convict accused only if ....
(1) Motive acts as a double-edged sword.(2) Disclosure statement – Statement of an accused recorded by a police officer under Section 27 of Evidence Act is basically a memorandum of confession of acc....
(1) Power of Supreme Court under Article 136 of Constitution of India is exercisable even in cases of concurrent findings of fact and such powers are very wide but in criminal appeals Supreme Court d....
The importance of credible eyewitness testimony, reliable and clinching evidence, and the exclusion of every possible hypothesis except guilt in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
(1) There should not be acquittal of guilty or conviction of innocent person.(2) Appeal against acquittal – It is only in rarest of rare cases, where High Court, on an absolutely wrong process of rea....
Conviction under Section 302 cannot rest on sole eyewitness testimony riddled with contradictions, delay in naming accused, medical inconsistencies, and unnatural conduct; prosecution must prove guil....
The court reaffirms that police conduct during official duties must not infringe on rights, prioritizing eyewitness testimony in establishing guilt over medical evidence, thus validating convictions ....
The court affirmed the conviction for murder, emphasizing the consistency of eyewitness accounts as reliable evidence supporting the charges under Sections 302 and 9(b) of the Indian Penal Code.
Direct evidence from credible eyewitnesses is sufficient for conviction under Section 302 IPC, and motive is not essential in such cases.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.