Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Sourendra Pandey, JJ
Rajkishore Ram @ Rajkishor Ram – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the appellant argued for unnatural death proof, while the respondent defended the acquittal. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 2. witness contradictions led to reasonable doubt regarding prosecution claims. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. the appellate court must respect acquittal unless clear guilt is established. (Para 21) |
| 4. final outcome: appeal dismissed. (Para 24 , 25) |
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 02-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as also perused the learned trial court records.
2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of acquittal passed on 17.01.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Gopalganj (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial court’) in Sessions Trial No. 173 of 2017, arising out of Sidhwaliya P.S. Case No. 59 of 2016.
3. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial court has been pleased to record a finding that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case. According to the learned trial court, the place of occurrence, 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
