Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
KOUSHAL PATWA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal appeals clubbed for common judgment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. prosecution alleges robbery and murder by appellants. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. trial court convicted based on evidence presented. (Para 5) |
| 4. defense argues lack of evidence against appellants. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 5. court considers arguments from both parties. (Para 9) |
| 6. court affirms death was homicidal based on evidence. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 7. circumstantial evidence principles outlined for conviction. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 8. prosecution's failure to prove weapon used for crime. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 9. extra judicial confession is weak evidence requiring corroboration. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 10. confession inadmissible due to police presence. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 11. trial court's conviction set aside due to lack of evidence. (Para 22) |
| 12. judgment of acquittal and order for bail. (Para 23 , 24) |
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
2. These criminal appeals have been preferred by three appellants : Chand Dev @ Bhoda (A-1), Kousal Patwa (A-2) & Mahadev Gupta (A-3) under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.03.2018 passed by the learned Second
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
