Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 304(Part II) -- Appellant after setting deceased on fire, took the children out of house and had latched the door from outside when deceased was still burning inside - He prevented anybody else to help deceased - Evidence in the form of two dying declarations of deceased and direct evidence of daughter of appellant corroborates the..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201, 34, Arms Act, 1959, Section 25(1)(a), 5 -- Offence u/Ss. 302, 201, 34 IPC & Ss.25(1)(a), 5 Arms Act - Conviction - Prosecution failed to prove directions of entry or exit of bullet or explain its inward or outward journey - Even, imprints on pistol have not been matched with accused - Prosecution witnesses testified that accused..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 8 -- Murder - Subsequent conduct - Subsequent conduct of cleaning up the scene and restoring living room in its original shape, although punishable in law, does not become so unnatural that it could be made basis to convict accused for commission of murder without additional evidence to that effect...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 -- Murder - Merely on basis of fact that no independent witness had come forward to support prosecution case, prosecution story as set up by prosecution cannot be discarded...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 304(Part II) -- Nature of offence - Incident took place at the spur of moment in a heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel - There was no premeditation of mind - No fracture has been found on body and head of deceased, which indicates that appellants had no intention to cause grievous injuries or to kill deceased - Accused convicted u/s..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34 -- Murder - Testimony of two eye witnesses - Deceased and his wife had gone to village pond with their buffalo while brother of deceased saw the incident when they were proceeding towards his house - Both were most natural witnesses - Merely because no independent witness was examined would not create a doubt in prosecution case -..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 -- Murder - Appellant was neither carrying any dagger nor had inflicted any injury to deceased - It was co-accused who inflicted blows with dagger to deceased - Presence of finger prints of appellant on dagger further creates a suspicion and doubt on case of prosecution since appellant had never handled dagger - There is no enmity..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 24 -- Murder of husband by wife - Death by poisoning - Extra judicial confession - Prime evidence against accused that she made an extra judicial confession before PW7 - Production of accused by PW7 before DSP stands proved - Accused made a disclosure statement before DSP regarding incident and recovery..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201 -- Murder of husband by wife - Death by poisoning - No eye witness to occurrence - Factum of recovery of dead body from pond at the instance of accused stands fully established - Dead body was duly identified by sister of deceased - Proximity of place of recovery of dead body from pond near house of accused is in tune with case of..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201 -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Last seen theory - Nature of circumstantial evidence available against appellant though raises doubt that he may have committed murder but same is not so conclusive that he can be convicted on the evidence of `last seen together' - Appellant acquitted...........
