Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
*R. G. Avachat, Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Shankar Harishchandra Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant convicted for murder shortly after marriage. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. prosecution relies on circumstantial evidence. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. circumstantial evidence must exclude all reasonable hypotheses. (Para 8 , 12 , 14 , 18 , 29) |
| 4. independence of medical testimonies affects credibility. (Para 11 , 13 , 28) |
| 5. the appeal is granted due to reasonable doubt. (Para 30) |
1. The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under S.302 and S.201 of Indian Penal Code and therefore, sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and R.I. for three years, respectively, with default stipulation, vide the judgment and order dated 02.05.2019, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Latur, in Sessions case No.92 of 2016. The appellant is, therefore, in this appeal before us.
2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present appeal are as follows: -
Appellant married Karishma (deceased) on 10.07.2016, at village Kavtha - Pati. The appellant started suspecting character of his wife (Karishma). He, therefore, assaulted on her cheek. On 2-3 occasions, post marriage, Karishma had been to her parental house. She had related the same to her mother. It so happened that o
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
