Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 458, 392, 394, 397, 34-- Lurking house trespass - Voluntary causing hurt in committing robbery - Accused allegedly armed with knife robbed gold chain of complainant and inflicted injuries to her - However, vital contradictions in the statements of PWs about robbing gold chain - Complainant did not furnish any description..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 394-- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Recovery of blood stained shirt, silver and gold ornaments and piece of blood stained brick - Blood group found on the shirt of accused was not detected - Recoveries of ornaments at the instance of accused not proved, as there is no evidence available on record..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394, 397, 34, Arms Act, 1959, Section 25-- Robbery - Identification of accused - Accused `S' duly identified by complainant, as the person who robbed him and beaten him and then bolted him in the toilet of train along with other passengers - Complainant not identified any other accused - Contention that identification of accused in Court..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394, 397, 34, Arms Act, 1959, Section 25-- Robbery - Disclosure statement of co-accused in another case - No evidence on record against three accused except the reference made by co-accused `S' in the disclosure statement as regards the role of these three accused - Only that portion of information in disclosure statement which lead to..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394, 397, 34, Arms Act, 1959, Section 25-- Robbery - Three accused convicted on the basis of recoveries effected from accused in another case - Prosecution case entirely rests on the evidence collected in another case against these three accused - However, no case is made out against said three accused as held in that case - Prosecution..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394, 302-- Robbery and murder - Hostile witnesses - Recovery of dead body - PW3 & PW4 declared hostile - Nothing could be extracted by prosecution from PW3 & PW4 by way of their cross-examination - Evidence led by prosecution in the shape of PW3 & PW4 appears to be of no avail for prosecution regarding..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394, 302-- Robbery and murder - Eye witnesses - Due to inconsistency, lack of coherence in inter se testimony of PW6 & PW7 about numbers of assailants, manner of occurrence, use of weapon of assault and nature of injuries sustained by deceased their testimony comes within the shadow of doubt - Their conduct..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394, 302-- Robbery and murder - Theory of use of fire arm - Use of fire arm weapon in commission of offence does not find support from medical evidence - Neither any pellets nor empty cartridges were recovered from the person of deceased nor from the place of occurrence - I.O has not recovered any evidence..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394-- Robbery - Recovery of offence of weapon - As per witnesses place of recovery was bush behind building which was under construction - However, according to seizer list, weapon of offence was recovered from the pucca place on the first floor of the building - Discrepancy found as to place of..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 394, 324, 411-- Voluntary causing hurt in committing robbery - Accused alone caused hurt to PW4 with the weapon before snatching away her golden ornaments - Neither any person other than accused caused alleged hurt nor any person was jointly concerned in alleged commission of offence of robbery - Injury sustained..........
