Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 364A, 365, 307, 392, 394, 186, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 106 -- Kidnapping for ransom - Attempt to murder - Burden of proof - Chance prints lifted from stolen car were matched with right thumb of accused - No explanation given by accused as to how fingerprints were detected from said vehicle which was used during commission of offence -..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 392, 397 -- Robbery - Expression `the offender' used in S.397 IPC pertains to actual offender to accused person who at the time of committing robbery or dacoity uses any deadly weapon or causes grievous hurt to any person or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person - But it does not include all such persons who participate in..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 392, 397, 353, 336, 506(ii), 34 -- Robbery - PW1 stated that he could not visualize as to who was pointing out knife towards him - He could not place any documents to show that chain belongs to him - Prosecution failed to prove charges against accused that he used a deadly weapon during robbery - Accused not guilty of offences in question -..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 392, 397, 353, 336, 506(ii), 34 -- Robbery - Testimony of official witnesses - Presence of official witnesses not proved at the spot for the simple reason that Note book maintained by police was not filed nor corroborated by independent witnesses - Serious material contradictions found in the evidence of official witnesses - More so, no..........
Evidence Act, 1872, Section 24, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 392 -- Extra-judicial confession - Murder case - PW2 stated that accused confessed before PW1 and who in turn told about the same to him - Information received by PW2 from PW1 about extra-judicial confession made by accused is thus, hearsay - Such hearsay evidence of PW2 relating to so called confession..........
Evidence Act, 1872, Section 30, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 392 -- Confession of co-accused - Murder case - Accused cannot be convicted solely on the basis of extra-judicial confessional statements of co-accused, which were not corroborated by cogent and reliable evidence...........
Evidence Act, 1872, Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 392 -- Recovery of rope - Murder case - Accused cannot be convicted on the basis of recovery of rope which was used for committing the offence in the absence of any link of rope with crime, as it is a common material or thing which is available anywhere in market or at every household - Accused..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 392, 412 -- Robbery - Dishonestly receiving stolen property - Stolen cash was recovered from accused soon after robbery - No explanation was given for the same - Failure on the part of accused to account for currency notes which bear signatures of bank personnel and were shortly recovered after robbery unerringly points towards guilt of..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 364, 392, 34 -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Place of occurrence verified pursuant to information supplied on behalf of accused - However, place of occurrence was already known to police, in as much as, it is the same place from where dead body of deceased was recovered - Verification of place by accused which was already known..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 364, 392, 34 -- Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Recovery of tempo at the instance of accused - Tempo was recovered from open place and not from conscious possession of accused - Witnesses of recovery were examined by prosecution but they have not uttered a single word regarding said recovery being effected in their presence - Such..........
