Prasad vs State - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 3761

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Ganediwala
For the Respondents: Shri Gavand, Shri Deshmukh

Table of Content
1. appeal challenges conviction via conflicting dying declarations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. prosecution case and trial witnesses summarized. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. doubts on kerosene seizure and investigation bonafides. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
4. principles for evaluating multiple dying declarations. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
5. accidental declarations assessed for reliability. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
6. homicidal declarations reveal material inconsistencies. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50)
7. witness corroboration undermined by delays, improvements. (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71)
8. dowry motive rejected as witness improvements. (Para 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76)
9. accused explanation under section 106 adequate. (Para 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84)
10. prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97)

JUDGMENT : (PER : S. M. MODAK, J.)

1. The Appellant is convicted by the Court of Additional Sessions