Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High 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

Similar News