Back
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vivek Russia, Satyendra Kumar Singh, JJ
Rajesh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. circumstances surrounding the deaths and history of dowry demands constitute key evidence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the execution of the investigation and evidence collection led to the prosecution's case. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. circumstantial evidence gathered from witness testimonies implies guilt. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. failure to provide an explanation strengthens the prosecution's case. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence without eyewitness account. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT
(Heard on 2nd December 2021) (Delivered on 5th January 2022)
Per se Vivek Rusia, J :
The appellants have filed the present appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.11.2006 passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Sessions Trial No. 309/2005 whereby they have been convicted u/s. 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC on two counts and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000 - 1,000/- each and in default of payment to further undergo 6-6 months additional RI.
The facts of the case, in short, are as under :
2. As per the prosecution story, the marriage of deceased Rajni @ Surekha was solemnized with appellant No.1 – Rajesh S/o. Lax
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
