Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Sanjay Dhar, Sanjay Parihar, JJ
Ali Mohammad Dar – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedures for fir and charge framing in homicidal death cases. (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. appreciation of witness testimonies and evidentiary value of investigations. (Para 8 , 9 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 3. admissibility of disclosure statements under section 27 of evidence act. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 4. standard of proof for circumstantial evidence in criminal trials. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 5. acquittal due to failure of prosecution to prove guilt beyond doubt. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
J U D G E M E N T
Per Sanjay Parihar-J
1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Kulgam (hereinafter referred to as “the Trial Court”) in File Nos.330/B and 57/B arising out of FIR No. 343/2013 registered at Police Station Kulgam for offences under Sections 302/34 and 120-B RPC. By virtue of the impugned judgment, both the appellants came to be convicted for the offence u/s 302 RPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. A fine of ₹3,00,000/- was also imposed upon appellant Ali M
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
