Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 364, 365, 380, 395, 34 -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Last seen theory - There is gap of five days from the date on which deceased was taken away by accused and dead body was recovered - However, prosecution failed to prove that dead body was recovered at the instance of A-3 - Last seen evidence not proved...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 364, 365, 380, 395, 34, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 27 -- Murder - Disclosure statement - Recovery of dead body of deceased - No confessional statement of A-3 was recorded u/s 27 of the Act with regard to recovery of dead body - Prosecution thus, failed to prove the circumstance that dead body of deceased was recovered at the instance..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 364, 365, 380, 395, 34, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 27 -- Murder - Disclosure statement - Recovery of spade at the instance of A-1 - Recovery effected from a place which was already known and not exclusively within knowledge of A-1 - Recovery is not reliable - Accused acquitted...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201, 34 -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Identification of rings worn by deceased - Naib Tehsildar has stated that at the time of recovery of dead body, she noticed that rings in the hand of deceased - However, neither father nor brother of deceased stated that seized rings belonged to deceased and they had seen the rings in the..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201, 34 -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Last seen together - There is considerable time gap between last seen alive of deceased with accused and time when dead body of deceased was recovered which is about after 10 days - It cannot be held that accused are perpetrator/author of offence in absence of corroboration - Last seen..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 378(3), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34 -- Appeal against acquittal - Murder - Courts below has given a categorical finding that evidence is so scanty that accused cannot be punished or convicted for offences for which they are charged - Factual scenario will not permit us to take a different view than that taken by Court..........
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 145(2) -- Dishonour of cheque - Cross-examination of complainant - Accused has no probable defence for which complainant must be recalled and he must be granted leave to cross-examine complainant - Merely vague statements have been made in application to somehow try and fit the case within scope of S.145(2) of N.I.Act -..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34, 201, 120B -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Motive - Prior property dispute between parties - Prosecution failed to prove and establish that only accused had motive to commit murder of deceased - Rather other materials available on record would go to suggest that agnates who had deposed against accused had greedy eye on the..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34, 201, 120B -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Last seen evidence - Conflicting evidence on record on last seen circumstance put forward by prosecution - Prosecution has failed to establish that accused were last seen along with deceased - Last seen evidence not proved...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34, 201, 120B -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Recoveries made at the instance of accused would have some corroborative value only when prosecution could have proved and established chain of circumstances i.e motive and last seen which are not proved - There is complete lack of evidence on prior meeting of mind of accused or of..........
