Back
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J
Ranjit Ghimirey – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the parties, charges, and procedural history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. summary of defense contentions regarding lack of evidence and prosecution's case presentation. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. critical evaluation of evidentiary gaps and witness credibility in proving the identity of the accused. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. application of the principles of circumstantial evidence and the requirement for proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. setting aside of convictions and final acquittal of the appellants. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
JUDGMENT
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
1. Crl.A. No.10 of 2024 (Ranjit Ghimirey vs. State of Sikkim) and Crl.A. No.11 of 2024 (Madan Subba vs. State of Sikkim), are being disposed of by this common Judgment.
2. For brevity, the Appellant in Crl.A. No.10 of 2024, shall be referred to as “A1” and the Appellant in Crl.A. No.11 of 2024 as “A2”.
3. A1 was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of three years each, under Sections 468, 471, 420 read with Section 34 and Section 120B(2) of the IPC along with fine of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only, each, under each of the Sections with default s
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
