Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO
Chakali Agamaiah – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana through rep. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B.R.Madhusudhan Rao, J.
1. This Memorandum of Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) assailing the sentence and conviction passed by the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge at Medak in SC No.69 of 2015, dated 21.12.2018, where under the appellants-A1 and A2 were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for Life and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default of payment of fine they shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of Six months each.
2.1. The case of the prosecution is that on 08.04.2014 at about 0200 hours, PW.1-B.Laxmi lodged a written complaint stating that on 06.04.2014, at about 8.00 P.M. her husband B.Narsimlu went to the house of G.Laxmi to obtain lease of her land. G.Laxmi has dragged her husband B.Narsimlu into the house and bolted the latches and called Chakali Agamaiah (A1). A1 and his younger brother Chakali Ashok (A2) were having illegal intimacy with G.Laxmi, went there with axes, fortunately he escaped from there. As such, A1 and A2 developed grudge against h
The court reiterated that in criminal trials, if two interpretations are possible, the one favoring the accused must be adopted, especially when prosecution evidence is found unreliable.
The conviction for murder was upheld based on substantial eyewitness testimony and evidence of motive, affirming the principle that direct evidence substantiates a guilty verdict beyond reasonable do....
The accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt when witness testimonies are inconsistent and unreliable, leading to a lack of credible evidence for conviction.
Prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; lack of motive and unreliable witness testimonies undermine conviction.
The standards of proof in criminal law necessitate that the prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, which was not met due to lack of reliable evidence.
Conviction under Section 302, IPC was altered to Section 304 for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, based on the heat of passion during a family quarrel.
Circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain leading to guilt; the absence of direct evidence does not negate conviction if circumstantial evidence is compelling.
The court ruled that eyewitness evidence, despite familial bias, may be credible; thus, a conviction under Section 304(i) IPC was appropriate, reflecting mitigating circumstances and reevaluating the....
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
