Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
,
Prantosh Das and Nihar Ranjan Roy alias Powder Raju – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background and details of the incidents leading to the case (Para 1 , 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. trial court's appreciation of evidence and observations (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments by defense and prosecution regarding evidence sufficiency (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. principles of circumstantial evidence and the doctrine of innocence (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. counterarguments regarding witness reliability and abscondence implications (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. final judgment on evidentiary insufficiency leading to acquittal (Para 17 , 18) |
1. All these appeals, being Cri.A.(J) No.48 of 2016 [Prantosh Das and Anr. v. State of Tripura], Cri.A.(J) No.60 of 2016 [Abu Sayed Miah and Anr. v. State of Tripura] and Cri.A.(J) No.61 of 2016[Jagadish Rabi Das alias Bhaiya v. State of Tripura], arise from the judgment and order dated 24.08.2016 delivered in Sessions Trial (Type - I) 86 of 2014 by the Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, Court No.2.
By the said judgment, the appellants in Cri.A.(J) No.48 of 2016, namely Prantosh Das and Nihar Ranjan Roy alias Powder Raju, the appellants in Cri.A.(J) No.60 of 2016, namely Abu Sayed Miah and Yasin Miah and the appellant in Cri.A.(J) No.61 of 2016,
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
