Back
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
EDWIN SUNGOH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MEGHALAYA – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
W.DIENGDOH, J.
1. This is a case where two persons, a mother and her son-in-law were said to have been murdered by the appellant herein on 14.05.1992 at the house of the deceased at Khliehrangnah Lum Muchai in the West Jaintia Hills District of the State. The names of the deceased are Lur @ Lo Rabon (D1) and his mother-in-law, Lakma @ Kma Sungoh (D2).
2. From the records what could be gathered is that though there was no initial FIR lodge, however, apparently, the police were informed of such incident, when on 15.05.1992 one Wanbeit Shullet, the local Member of the District Council (MDC) came along with the appellant to the police station at Jowai, whereby the said Mr. Shullet informed the police that the appellant had committed a double murder. The said information was noted in the G.D. (General Dairy) Entry vide Jowai P.S. G.D. Entry No. 500 dated 15.05.1992. The appellant was placed under custody immediately.
3. It is also noticed from the records that on forwarding of the said GDE No. 500 dated 15.05.1992 on 20.05.1992, the Officer Incharge, Jowai Police station was requested to convert the same as the FIR on the ground that the relatives of the deceased persons declined
The absence of motive does not impair reliable eyewitness testimony; direct evidence is sufficient for conviction.
It is well settled that the prosecution must stand or fall on its own legs and it cannot derive any strength from weakness of defence. This is trite law. However, where various links in a chain are i....
Conviction for murder by unlawful assembly sustainable on reliable sole eyewitness to killing, corroborated by medical evidence and abduction witnesses, despite FIR delay, witness non-examination, an....
Point of Law : When there are eyewitnesses to prove the charge, failure on the part of the prosecution to establish every link in the chain of circumstance would become irrelevant.
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.
The court established that a conviction for murder can be sustained on the basis of circumstantial evidence, provided that the evidence forms a complete chain that leads to the only reasonable conclu....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, and the importance of credible and consistent witness testimonies.
The defendant's conviction for murder was overturned due to unreliable eyewitness accounts and the prosecution's failure to examine the investigating officer, raising reasonable doubt.
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
