Back
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.SURENDER, ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, JJ
Reddy Praveen Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. Surender, J.
1. The appellant is the sole accused convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302 of IPC and he is also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 201 IPC vide judgment in S.C.No.264 of 2014 dated 02.03.2016 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.
2. In all three persons died in the present case, who are parents and elder sister’s son of the appellant. Parents will be referred as D1 an D2 and the boy as D3 hereinafter.
3. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that on 29.08.2013, at around 3.15 a.m, P.Ws.3 and 4 heard screams of the appellant. When they opened the door, they observed the appellant outside his house screaming and they found smoke coming from his house. P.W.3 called the Fire Station in BHEL. Around 3.30 a.m, P.W.9/fire station officer received information that smoke was coming from home of the deceased. Immediately, he along with his crew took the fire engine and proceeded towards the house of the deceased. There, he found smoke and sprayed water. Around 3.50 a.m, the appellant telephoned to his cousins P.Ws.1 and 2 and asked them to come to his house in BHEL. Immediately, t
In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, the burden shifts to the accused to explain the circumstances, and failure to do so can strengthen the prosecution's case.
Conviction must be based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence; lack of motive and conflicting witness statements create reasonable doubt dismissing the case.
(1) Mere suspicion would not be sufficient unless circumstantial evidence tendered by prosecution leads to conclusion that it “must be true” and not “may be true”.(2) Failure to explain can only be h....
Murder – Only on the basis of post-mortem report there cannot be conviction for offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of circumstantial evidence and the burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act in cases where the accused fails to provid....
(1) Section 106 of Evidence Act will apply to those cases where prosecution has succeeded in establishing facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn.(2) When a case is resting on circumstan....
In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, a complete chain of evidence establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt is critical; any reasonable doubt must lead to the acquittal of the accused.
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence and the burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act.
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
