9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Conviction and sentence based on circumstantial evidence, sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt, defense of false implication and enmity, alibi defense raised by the appellant. Analysis: The judgment by the Supreme Court of India involves the conviction of the appellant for the murder of a 10 or 12-year-old girl in her house in a village in Mathura. The appellant was sentenced to death by the Sessions Judge, which was confirmed by the High Court. The case was based on circumstantial evidence as no eye-witnesses came forward. The defense argued false implication due to enmity and raised an alibi defense, claiming the appellant was away in Mathura on the day of the murder. However, the High Court found the circumstantial evidence against the appellant to be fully established. The prosecution's case revolved around the appellant's alleged threats towards the victim and his presence near the crime scene. The appellant was seen entering the victim's house on the day of the murder and was later found wearing a blood-stained shirt, which was identified as his. Additionally, a chopper stained with human blood, believed to belong to the appellant, was found near the victim's body. The High Court concluded that these circumstances, when considered together, were consistent only with the guilt of the appellant and reasonably excluded any other hypothesis. The defense's arguments, including the suggestion of a thief committing the murder and the alibi defense of the appellant being in Mathura, were dismissed by the High Court. The petition filed by the appellant in Mathura on the day of the murder did not establish a credible alibi. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and death sentence, emphasizing the heinous nature of the crime and the lack of mitigating circumstances. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant were upheld.
|
