Indian Penal Code,1860  - Acquittal of charges

Acquittal of charges - Appeal - Committing murder of 2 persons - High Court set aside conviction - Alleged incident - Sought to be proved by PW3. - High Court disbelieved her evidence - Ground - She was unlikely to be present at the scene of incident - Her name did not figure in FIR - Improved her version - Not even tally with - Version given by injured - Ocular version - Contradicted by medical evidence - No plausible explanation - Delay in registration of FIR - Doubted authenticity of version given by PW3 - Ultimately concluded - Cumulative effect of all infirmities of prosecution - Probabilities of plea of self defence - Renders case doubtful - Supreme Court conclusions by High Court cannot be said - Either perverse or based on no evidence - Rightly acquitted on benefit of doubt - Appeal dismissed.

Found In:  Topic Index, Imp. Decision, Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 307

Conviction - Appeal to Supreme Court - Medical evidence - Allegation of fire arm injury - P.M report - Lacerated wound-cast doubt - Acquittal of 302 - No offence u/s-307 - Converted and convicted u/s-325 r/w 34 IPC - Under gone - Appeal modified.

Found In:  Topic Index, Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 447 , Section 149 , Section 147 , Section 148

Murder, unlawful assembly, rioting with deadly weapons - conviction and sentence - Appeal - Testimony of prosecution witnesses is found convincing and trust worthy about the incident - Statements of PWs 1 to 4 and the assertion of PW-7 who conducted the autopsy on the body of deceased clearly showed that the prosecution established its charge that both the deceased died due to the injuries sustained in the incident - Intention and knowledge to cause death has been amply demonstrated and proved - Prosecution established long standing land and water dispute among the deceased and the accused, the evidence of eye-witnesses are acceptable, contradictions are trivial in nature and medical evidence corroborate the assertion of prosecution witnesses - Supreme Court no interference in the order passed by the courts below - Appeal dismissed.

Found In:  Imp. Decision

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 120-B

Murder and criminal conspiracy - Trial Court convicted - High Court acquittal - Appeal - FIR - Husband Chatra died after falling - Another complaint by PW.2 along with PW.1 - daughter of deceased aged about 8 years stating - Both respondents-accused had murdered Chatra - Deposition of a child witness may require corroboration - Case his deposition inspires confidence - No embellishment or improvement therein - Court may rely upon his evidence - Post mortem - Cause of death - `Asphyxia' as a result of throttling - Statement of PW-1/child witness - Affirmed by statements of other witnesses - Proved circumstances and medical evidence - Her deposition being precise, concise, specific and vivid without any improvement or embroidery is worth acceptance in toto - Judgment of High Court set aside - Order of trial Court restored - appeal allowed.

Found In:  Imp. Decision, Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302

Conviction and sentence -Brutal murder of a sex worker - Appellant caught victim by hair - Banged her head against floor and wall - Several times - Resulting her death - Trial Court convicted - Sentenced to life imprisonment - High Court upheld the conviction and sentence - Appeal - Incident was witnessed by 4 persons- Medical evidence - Corroboration with ocular testimony - Supreme Court - Accused has committed murder - A brutal manner of - Helpless women - Deserves no sympathy - Appeal dismissed.

Found In:  Imp. Decision, Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302

Murder - Accused poured Kerosene oil on his wife and 4 daughters and set them on fire - Consequence of serious burn injuries - Wife and 3 daughters died instantaneously - Elder daughter taken to hospital - She also died after giving dying declaration - Trial court convicted under Section 302 of IPC - Sentenced to death - Case fell within the rarest of the rare category - High Court acquitted - Declining murder reference - Appeal - After ascertaining from doctor fitness - Dying declaration recorded - In presence of doctor fact - Accused received burn injuries - Corroborated by medical evidence - Accused has been free on acquittal for more than 6 years - It difficult to re-impose death sentence - Impugned judgment of High Court set aside - Trial Court restored - Extent of conviction under Section 302 IPC - Direct accused to undergo a sentence of life imprisonment - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Imp. Decision, Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 448 , Section 34 , Section 302 , Section 114

House trespass with common intention and murder - Conviction and sentence - Deceased was sitting in front of his house - When A-1 and A-2 attacked him - Admitted to hospital - Head Constable recorded statement of injured -Special Mobile Magistrate recorded dying declaration - Injured succumbed to injuries - Trial court relying on eye-witness PWs-1, 3 and 4 - On two dying declarations - Convicted A-1 and A-2 under Sections 448 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code - Imprisonment for one year and life respectively - A-3 and A-4 acquitted - High Court confirmed conviction - Appeal - No material difference between 2 dying declarations - Medical evidence clearly supports the eye-witness account - PWs 1 & 3 presence at spot was natural - Incident happened in the house of deceased - No confusion about identity of the appellants - Appeal dismissed.

Found In:  Imp. Decision, Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 366 , Section 376 , Section 302 , Section 201

Kidnapping, rape, murder and causing disappearance of evidence of offence - Conviction and sentence under - Appeal - Evidence of the prosecution witnesses prove beyond all reasonable doubt that appellant proceeded towards the betel shop few minutes after the deceased left and it was the appellant who was last seen with the deceased going together on a bicycle - Overwhelming evidence on record which proves beyond any shadow of doubt that the statement given by the appellant led to the recovery of the dead body of minor girl from the field - Circumstances so proved unerringly point towards the guilt of the appellant - Held that the case falls in the category of the rarest of the rare cases and the death sentence awarded by the trial Court and confirmed by the High Court is upheld - Appeal dismissed.

Found In:  Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302

Conviction and sentence - Deceased was found lying in an unconscious state on road - Taken to hospital he came to his senses - Gave a dying declaration - Appellant accused - Assaulting deceased - Deceased expired next morning - Trial Court acquitted - High Court upset acquittal - Believed dying declaration - Convicted - Appeal - Some witnesses claimed - Deceased made dying declaration - After regained consciousness - PW-14 claimed till 3 pm, there was no dying declaration - No medical evidence - Suggesting - Deceased was in a fit medical condition to make such a dying declaration -Witnesses heard dying declaration - Reported the matter to PW-14 who made FIR - Would never have failed to mention name - Impugned judgment of High Court set aside and that of trial Court restored - Confirming acquittal - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 149 , Section 302 , Section 324 , The Arms Act,1959  - Section 27

Murder - Conviction - Challenged - Appellants were convicted for the offence punishable u/s. 302 of the IPC r/w s. 27 of the Arms Act, s. 302 r/w s. 149 of the IPC and s. 324 r/w s. 149 of the IPC - Conviction was upheld by HC - Appeal - Discrepancies in prosecution witnesses - Held, evidence of injured persons about the nature of injury contradict each other - Witnesses were not able to identify the actual place of occurrence - They all had a different version about the nature of injuries and they were not consistent whether the deceased died at the spot or on the way to hospital or in the hospital - Hence, in view of their improvements with due deliberation and consultation and in the absence of credible explanation, conviction based on their testimony could not be sustained - Acquitted.

Found In:  Judgement