High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court Allahabad High Court Denies Tax Refund for Hybrid Vehicle Purchased Before Electric Vehicle Exemption Policy Entering A Room with Someone Cannot, By Any Stretch Of Imagination, Be Considered Consent For Sexual Intercourse: Bombay High Court No Specific Format Needed for Dying Declaration, Focus on Mental State and Voluntariness: Calcutta High Court Delhi High Court Allows Direct Appeal Under DVAT Act Without Tribunal Reference for Pre-2005 Tax Periods NDPS | Mere Registration of Cases Does Not Override Presumption of Innocence: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Previous Antecedents and No Communal Tension: High Court Grants Bail in Caste-Based Abuse Case Detention of Petitioner Would Amount to Pre-Trial Punishment: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in Dowry Harassment Case Loss of Confidence Must Be Objectively Proven to Deny Reinstatement: Kerala High Court Reinstates Workman After Flawed Domestic Enquiry Procedural lapses should not deny justice: Andhra High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Canteen Subsidy Constitutes Part of Dearness Allowance Under EPF Act: Gujarat High Court Concurrent Findings Demonstrate Credibility – Jharkhand High Court Affirms Conviction in Cheating Case 125 Cr.P.C | Financial responsibility towards dependents cannot be shirked due to personal obligations: Punjab and Haryana High Court Mere Acceptance of Money Without Proof of Demand is Not Sufficient to Establish Corruption Charges Gujrat High Court Evidence Insufficient to Support Claims: Orissa High Court Affirms Appellate Court’s Reversal in Wrongful Confinement and Defamation Case Harmonious Interpretation of PWDV Act and Senior Citizens Act is Crucial: Kerala High Court in Domestic Violence Case

Delay In Registration Of FIR Not Fatal To Prosecution’s Case In Complex Crimes: Telangana High Court Upholds Conviction In Rajlakshmi Jewellers Dacoity

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Telangana High Court today upheld the conviction of the accused in the notorious dacoity at M/s. Rajlakshmi Jewellers, while modifying their life sentences to ten years in light of their reformation and time already served.

The bench, comprising Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman and Hon’ble Smt. Justice K. Sujana, affirmed the conviction of Gopal Ramana Shetty and Mini Gopal under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code for their involvement in an armed heist that resulted in the theft of valuables worth approximately Rs. 1.5 Crores.

The appellants were accused of orchestrating a dacoity with a gang on December 26, 2003, targeting the prominent Rajlakshmi Jewellers in Hyderabad. The primary issues in their appeal included challenges to the sufficiency of evidence, especially concerning the identification process and the alleged delays in the investigation and registration of the FIR.

Identification and Arrest: The court highlighted the effectiveness of the identification parade and the subsequent arrests based on a confession by one of the accused, which led to the recovery of part of the stolen property.

Evidence and Procedural Challenges: Addressing concerns over procedural delays, the High Court deemed the delays reasonable, attributing them to the complexities of the case. It stressed that such delays were not fatal to the prosecution’s ability to present a coherent case.

Sentencing Review: Originally sentenced to life imprisonment, the sentences were reduced to ten years after reviewing principles of proportionality, reformation, and the appellants’ behavior during incarceration.

Decision: While the conviction for dacoity under Section 395 IPC was upheld, the sentence was modified to ten years, with directions for immediate release if the accused are not required for other legal proceedings, acknowledging the substantial portion of the sentence already served.

Date of Decision: May 3, 2024

Gopal Ramana Shetty, Mini Gopal v. State of Telangana

Similar News