9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Acquittal by Sessions Judge, conviction by High Court under Section 302 IPC. 2. Rejection of evidence by Sessions Judge, acceptance by High Court. 3. Arguments against High Court's decision by defense counsel. 4. Evaluation of evidence of alleged eye witness and confessional statements. 5. Examination of the confessional statement made to the Magistrate. 6. Corroboration of the confessional statement with other evidence. Analysis: 1. The case involved the appellant being acquitted by the Sessions Judge but later convicted by the High Court under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for killing the deceased by striking him with a stone on the head. The prosecution's case relied on witness testimonies and a confessional statement made by the accused. 2. The Sessions Judge rejected the evidence of the alleged eye witness and the extra-judicial confession due to doubts regarding voluntariness and inducement. However, the High Court reversed these findings, accepting the eye witness account, the judicial confession, and the confessional statement, leading to the conviction of the accused. 3. The defense counsel argued against the High Court's decision, questioning the acceptance of witness testimonies and the confessional statement. The defense contended that the evidence should not have been accepted, especially the confessional statement made to the Magistrate. 4. The examination of the alleged eye witness revealed inconsistencies in his testimony, leading to the rejection of his evidence by the Sessions Judge. The confessional statements made to village elders and the Magistrate were also scrutinized for voluntariness and inducement, with the High Court finding them admissible. 5. The confessional statement made to the Magistrate was evaluated for compliance with legal requirements. The Magistrate's certification of voluntariness was deemed sufficient, and the defense's argument for the Magistrate's examination as a witness was dismissed based on Section 80 of the Evidence Act. 6. Finally, the corroboration of the confessional statement with other evidence was analyzed. The High Court found sufficient general corroboration to uphold the conviction, citing the alignment of the confession with the motive for the crime and medical evidence. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision and the conviction of the accused under Section 302 IPC.
|
