Penal Code

A Complaint dated 13.04.2012 at 8:10 a.m was filed with the Koheer Police Station, Telangana, stating that on 08.04.20I2 at 9.00 p.m, accused 1-6 came to the Complainant’s house, physically assaulted his Mother, (Deceased), A1 further kicked forcefully on her stomach, due to which, she fell on ground and subsequently died in the hospital on […]

It is a case in which rape was committed on the prosecutrix by three accused, namely Avtar Singh, Sohal Lal, and Gian Singh, though one of them was acquitted by the trial court. However, the involvement of the appellants was proved beyond any doubt. Plea taken by them in defence was not found to be

In this case of multiple murders, deposition of surviving victim, held, could not form sole basis of conviction, as in a number of statements recorded of such witness, name of appellant-accused surfaced only in the last. However, there was other unimpeachable evidence, particularly the recovery evidence of purchase of bottle of pesticide by accused having

The inevitable conclusion is that the prosecution has failed to establish that the appellant had the knowledge that articles seized from his possession are stolen goods. In Trimbak vs. State of Madhya Pradesh5, this Court discussed the essential ingredients for conviction under Section 411 of the IPC. Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, in his erudite opinion

When a part of the evidence produced by the prosecution to bring the accused within the fold of S. 34 is disbelieved, held, the remaining part must be examined with adequate care and caution. .Both the appellants have been charged only based upon the rule of evidence available under Section 34 of the IPC. Section 34 does not constitute

Altercation between police officials in reporting room in police station resulting in accidental firing by service weapon, which caused death of one of them, murder, or, causing death by negligence, determined. The prosecution has failed to prove that the appellant had either any intention of causing the death of the deceased or the intention of

Direction for quashing of proceedings, after conducting mini trial, not justified, because, while exercising powers of quashing, High Court has to consider only the nature of accusations and allegations in the FIR and whether the averments/allegations in the FIR prima facie disclosed the commission of cognizable offence or not. Held, When a prayer for quashing

Requirements for invocation of S. 106, Evidence Act, explained. Acquittal granted to a man sentenced to death for alleged rape and murder of minor girl. Held, We cannot shy away from the fact that it is a ghastly case of rape and murder of a 6 year old child. By not conducting the investigation properly,

Held, The fact remains that there was rape and murder of a 14 year old girl. The guilt of the appellant was proved beyond reasonable doubt on account of testimony of direct eye-witnesses. The sentence awarded by the High Court is life imprisonment for the whole of biological life of the appellant without any remission.

In this case, deceased allegedly assaulted to death by two appellant-accused herein, father and son, using “tabal” and “axe”. Land dispute between appellants (Appellants 1 and 2) and deceased, was alleged cause of the incident. The High Court upheld conviction of appellants under S. 302 IPC. However, prosecution failed to established case beyond reasonable doubt.