IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
K.S. MUDAGAL, VENKATESH NAIK T
Chandra, S/o. Dasanna – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VENKATESH NAIK T, J.
Challenging the order of conviction and sentence, accused Nos.1 and 2 in S.C.No.5022/2014 dated 09-11-2018 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, to sit at Kanakapura, has preferred this appeal.
2. The appellants were tried in S.C.No.5022/2014 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ' IPC ') on the basis of the charge-sheet filed by Harohalli Police Station in Crime No.74/2014 of their Police Station.
3. The appellants are accused Nos.1 and 2 in S.C.No.5022/2014. For the purpose of convenience, the parties herein are referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the trial Court.
4. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
Accused No.2 was given in marriage to Sri Mante Lingaiah (hereinafter referred to as 'victim'). Accused No.2 developed illicit relationship with accused No.1 and the victim was the obstacle for their relationship. Hence, they hatched a plan to eliminate the victim. Accordingly, on 05.03.2014 at 11:00 p.m., when the victim was sleeping in the farm house at Survey No.83 of Sidi Deverahalli, accused No.1 came to the hou
Ramakant Rai v. Madan Rai and Others
State of Haryana v. Bhagirath and others
The standards of proof in criminal law necessitate that the prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, which was not met due to lack of reliable evidence.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a clear, unbroken chain pointing to guilt without reasonable doubt; the absence of direct evidence requires further corroboration for conviction.
The court ruled that eyewitness evidence, despite familial bias, may be credible; thus, a conviction under Section 304(i) IPC was appropriate, reflecting mitigating circumstances and reevaluating the....
The conviction for murder was upheld based on substantial eyewitness testimony and evidence of motive, affirming the principle that direct evidence substantiates a guilty verdict beyond reasonable do....
If the deceased had died on the previous day then it cannot be believed that the informant i.e. the PW-5 and the other members of the family including the PW-1 were not aware of the actual incident.
The court reiterated that in criminal trials, if two interpretations are possible, the one favoring the accused must be adopted, especially when prosecution evidence is found unreliable.
(1) Proof of fact – Law does not contemplate stitching pieces of evidence in a watertight manner, for standard of proof in a criminal case is not proof beyond all doubts but only beyond reasonable do....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal provisions related to culpable homicide and murder, and the consideration of the reformative theory of punishment in sente....
THE EVIDENCE OF EYEWITNESSES IS CREDIBLE AND INSPIRING CONFIDENCE. NON-SUPPORTING SUCH A VERSION BY INDEPENDENT WITNESSES WOULD BE NO GROUNDS, TO DISCARD THEIR TESTIMONY. THE PRESENCE OF PWS.1 AND 2 ....
When evidence of eye-witnesses are not trust worthy to believe, then motive place an important role to prove guilt of accused.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.