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...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201, 34, Arms Act, 1959, Section 3, 25, 27, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Section 2(33) -- Sessions Judge set aside the order of JJB declaring that respondent No. 2 was a juvenile delinquent on the date of the incident - Under the scheme of the JJ Act, 2015, a declaration of juvenility may not by itself..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 438, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 323, 427, 34, 120B -- Bail - Murder - Accused may have carried injured victim to Hospital who later died, but he was actually brought dead to hospital - This fact will have to be considered de hors from the fact as to who actually had committed offence in the first place - Trial Court has..........
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 483, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 149, 120B -- Bail - Murder - Petitioner is in custody for over 1 year 5 months - Case against him prima facie rests on circumstantial evidence - Petitioner is not clearly visible in CCTV footage and his name does not appear in dying declaration of deceased - No specific overt act..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 309 -- Triple murder case - Accused allegedly killed his wife and two daughters owing to financial distress and also attempted to commit suicide by slashing veins of his wrist - However, critical witnesses of crime have turned hostile - From the inception i.e. from FIR to site plan to recorded statements and to recovery memo, all..........
