Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Rajasthan High Court Allows Minor Girl Shelter Till Majority
06 Mar 2026
Criminal Probe Can't Continue Against Unknowns Sans Prima Facie Offence: Bombay HC Quashes CBI FIR
06 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadikari Bids Empathetic Farewell to Kerala High Court
06 Mar 2026
Compensation U/S 28A LA Act Not Restricted to Foundational Award: Bombay High Court
06 Mar 2026
Karnataka HC Issues Notice on Sri Lankan Judge's Right to be Forgotten Plea for Removing Alleged Defamatory Online Content
06 Mar 2026
Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
X, J
Biswajit Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
1. Accused Biswajit Das and Rabiul Hossain, both residents of district Sepahijala, Tripura stand convicted for having committed an offence punishable under S.302/394/449 read with S.34 and independently under S.120 - B of the IPC. Another accused namely, Rakibul Hossain did not face trial and as such was declared as a proclaimed offender, in relation to whom, at this point of time, no other and several action stands taken by the police and we are also not called upon to take view thereupon.
2. Undisputedly, with the registration of the FIR on 15.10.2013, police had also suspected complicity of another person, namely, Adhip Das (PW23) who also remained in judicial custody for a long time. It is not the case of the police that he is an approver.
3. In short, it is the case of the prosecution that sometime on 15th / 16th October, 2013 the accused namely, Biswajit Das, Rabiul Hossain, Rakibul Hossain a
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete and conclusive chain pointing to the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which was not established in this case.
The court upheld the conviction based on corroborative evidence despite non-compliance with Section 65-B of the Evidence Act regarding electronic records.
The court ruled that circumstantial evidence must establish a consistent and unbroken chain linking the accused to the crime, and any reliance on unreliability of recovery evidence warrants the benef....
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of evidence beyond reasonable doubt to secure a conviction.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and conclusive chain of evidence that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence; mere suspicion is ....
To convict under Section 396 IPC, prosecution must establish involvement of five or more persons in committing dacoity; failure to prove this essential requirement leads to acquittal.
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
Listen Article