Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P.SAM KOSHY, NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
State of Telangana – Appellant
Versus
Chiluka Gopai Pattidar Gopal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P. SAM KOSHY, J.
1. Heard Mr. M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant/State. Perused the record.
2. The present is an appeal which has been filed under Section 378(3) & (1) of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE seeking leave to appeal as also challenging the judgment of acquittal dated 28.03.2024 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Narayanpet in S.C.No.30 of 2023.
3. Vide the said impugned judgment, the learned trial Court i.e. Principal District and Sessions Judge, Narayanpet has found the two accused persons not guilty of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 379 read with Section 34 IPC.
4. The challenge to the said judgment of acquittal is primarily on the ground that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence of P.W.4 which gives the material pertaining to the last seen theory so far as the circumstantial evidence is concerned. It was also the contention of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that pursuant to the statement of P.W.4, suspicion had been raised against the two accused persons who were apprehended and on their confessional statement, ornaments, worn by the de
In cases of circumstantial evidence, a complete chain of proof is essential for conviction; mere suspicion is insufficient, and the presumption of innocence must be maintained.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence leading to the only conclusion of guilt for a conviction to be sustainable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a complete and conclusive chain of evidence in cases of circumstantial evidence, the importance of proper appreciation of evide....
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....
Convictions under circumstantial evidence require a complete and unbroken chain of proof; mere suspicion is insufficient for establishing guilt.
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
An acquittal should not be disturbed without substantial evidence against the acquitted; the presumption of innocence is a crucial standard in criminal appeals.
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain of evidence that excludes all 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
