Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

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

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


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.     

Similar News