Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Anita Sumanth, Sunder Mohan, JJ
D.Pradeep – Appellant
Versus
The State Represented By The Inspector of Police, Pallavaram Police Station, Chennai-43. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis of the appellant's relationship with the deceased. (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments challenging the circumstantial evidence. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. investigation details and evidence presented. (Para 6) |
| 4. critical assessment of witness testimonies. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. issues regarding vehicle ownership and its significance. (Para 10) |
| 6. legal standards for establishing guilt in circumstantial evidence. (Para 11) |
| 7. failure of prosecution to establish a complete chain of evidence. (Para 12) |
| 8. outcome of the appeal and acquittal of the accused. (Para 13) |
Judgment
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sunder Mohan J.)
This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the sole accused, challenging the judgment dated 03.10.2019 in S.C.No.134 of 2011, on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu, whereby he was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
2(i) The gist of the prosecution case is that the appellant and the deceased were known to each other; that the appellant had borrowed a sum of Rs.20,000/- from th
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
