Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Rajinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision challenges conviction for pension misappropriation. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. trial examined witnesses; victims turned hostile. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. lower courts convicted on entrustment and expert evidence. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. petitioner contests evidence; state upholds findings. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. victims' contradictory testimonies unreliable. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 7. prior statements only corroborate, not substantive. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 8. fingerprint evidence needs corroboration for conviction. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 9. accused acquitted; judgments set aside. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 01.07.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Shimla ( learned Appellate Court) vide which judgment of conviction dated 30.11.2013 and order of sentence dated 27.03.2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chopal, District Shimla, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arra
Uncorroborated fingerprint expert opinion insufficient for conviction under IPC Sections 409, 477A where beneficiaries turn hostile and deny non-disbursal of pension funds.
Revisional jurisdiction under CrPC 397 limited to patent defects/perversity; cannot re-appreciate evidence or disturb concurrent convictions based on credible testimony despite minor discrepancies or....
Revisional court acquitted accused in face of concurrent convictions, holding lower courts perversely overlooked prosecution doubts from witness contradictions, enmity, suspect recovery and accused's....
Procedural irregularities in criminal trials can result in quashing convictions if fair trial principles are violated.
The court emphasized the importance of independent evidence in establishing guilt and discussed the legal principles related to the comparison of disputed signatures and handwritings with admitted si....
The court established that a single reliable eyewitness can be sufficient for conviction, and that the trial court must not disregard credible evidence based on irrelevant considerations or minor dis....
The prosecution must prove entrustment and dishonest intent in offenses under sections 409 and 468 IPC, failure of which 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
