Four Accused Acquitted in Bahraich Murder Case – One Covicted Under Section 304 Part II IPC – Allahabad High Court

Share:
advocate judicial party RPF Advocates live Mother SARFAESI steel v Departmental properly Evidence Divorce Property Factual Bail FIR 376 Bail bail Child Allahabad High Cour 1989 Appointment Investigation Cheque Fear mother IIIT court Law application Acquittal 29A Marriage Maintenance Dowry Application dowryMarriage bail Land Earning Justice Written Statement Maintenance Summoning Rape Video Death Bail Guilty jurisdiction 138Assault investigation Temple bail Wife velectricity Child Drinking final murder Love Cheque Throwing Brick Husband NDPS Case  allahabad addition preliminary evidence Cheque Bounce murder evidence grievances dowry 210 consideration order corporation advocate certificate marriage application mechanical maintenance financial evidence electricity wife probation bail individual investigation

In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court has delivered its verdict in the Bahraich murder case, acquitting four of the accused while maintaining the conviction of one. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma, J., sheds light on the complex dynamics of the case and the intricacies of the legal proceedings.

In her observations, Justice Jyotsna Sharma emphasized the importance of a cautious approach when considering the roles of accused individuals, especially in cases involving multiple parties. She noted, “The only real safeguard against the risk of condemning the innocent with the guilty lies in insisting on acceptable evidence which in some measure implicates such accused and satisfies the conscience of the court.”

The case revolved around a tragic incident in which the deceased, Nanku Singh, sustained fatal injuries. The prosecution had named nine individuals in connection with the incident. However, the court found it safe to convict only one of them, Triveni Singh, under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This decision was based on clear and unimpeachable evidence that Triveni Singh had inflicted the fatal injuries with a ‘bhala.’

The judgment further highlighted the challenges in determining the culpability of all accused persons when there is a long-standing enmity between the parties involved. Justice Sharma acknowledged that enmity can be a double-edged sword, both instigating criminal incidents and providing opportunities for victim sides to retaliate.

Notably, the court also discussed the value and limitations of a First Information Report (FIR) in criminal cases. While FIRs are crucial for setting the legal process in motion, they are not considered substantive evidence. The court emphasized the need to rely on acceptable evidence that establishes the complicity of accused individuals beyond a reasonable doubt.

In conclusion, the judgment by Hon’ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma, J., in the Bahraich murder case underscores the significance of a meticulous approach to criminal trials, ensuring that justice is served while safeguarding the rights of the accused.

Date of Decision: 17.10.2023

Jangali Singh And Others   vs State of U.P.     

                 

Download Judgment

Share: