Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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

07 May 2024 2:49 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