In this case, death of deceased was due to burning in her matrimonial home. Case was based on circumstantial evidence and involvement of husband and mother-in-law (both appellant-accused herein) of deceased was alleged. Conviction of appellants under Ss. 302/34 and 201 IPC was upheld by High Court. The doctor who performed the post mortem opined that the cause of death was haemorrhage and shock due to ante-mortem injuries but the prosecution miserably failed to prove entire chain of circumstances which would unerringly establish that alleged act was committed by appellants only and none else. The said order was held, unsustainable. The impugned judgements set aside and the accused acquitted from the charges.

[Satye Singh v. State of Uttarakhand, (2022) 5 SCC 438]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Do not copy the content of this website.

Terms And condition

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

  1. The user wishes to gain more information about Re Legal, its practice areas for his/her own information and use
  2. That the information provided in the website is only for personal use or reference of the visitor and is provided only on his/her specific request.
  3. That the material available for downloading on the website and other information provided on the website would not create any lawyer-client relationship.
  4. That we are not responsible for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website.
  5. That in case the visitor has any legal issues; he or she should seek independent legal advice.

The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising.