Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Patna High Court Acquits Appellants In Attempted Murder Case Presence Of Any Of The Prosecution Witnesses Doubtful.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


PATNA, August 17, 2023 – In a significant verdict, the High Court of Judicature at Patna acquitted two appellants who were convicted in a case of attempted murder. The judgment, delivered by Honourable Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Pandey, highlighted the lack of reliable and convincing evidence presented by the prosecution.

The case (Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.34 of 2023) arose from an incident that occurred in Piri Bazar, Lakhisarai in 2015. The appellants, Rakesh Kumar and Fantush Mandal, were convicted by the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial court had sentenced them to ten years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 10,000 each.

Justice Alok Kumar Pandey, in his judgment, meticulously examined the evidence presented before the court and observed, “The evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses is full of infirmities and contradictions.” The court noted that the informant, who put the initial version of the prosecution story in motion, claimed to be an eyewitness but was not present at the scene of the alleged crime. Moreover, the victim, who could have been a key witness, was not produced in court for examination.

The judgment further highlighted that the prosecution's witnesses, despite claiming to be eyewitnesses, had inconsistent accounts regarding the place of occurrence, the manner of occurrence, and the boundary of the crime scene. The court noted, “The presence of any of the prosecution witnesses at the place of occurrence is very much doubtful.”

Justice Pandey emphasized the importance of reliable and trustworthy evidence in criminal cases. Quoting a previous judgment, he noted, “Normally, an injured witness would enjoy greater credibility because he is the sufferer himself and thus, there will be no occasion for such a person to state an incorrect version of the occurrence.”

Ultimately, the court held that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the appellants. The judgment serves as a reminder of the high standard of evidence required in criminal cases, especially in cases involving serious charges like attempted murder.

The decision of the High Court to acquit the appellants highlights the significance of presenting robust and consistent evidence in order to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal proceedings.

Date of Decision:  17-08-2023

RAKESH KUMAR @ CHANDAN MANDAL vs The State of Bihar Bihar

Latest Legal News