0

The evidence of an injured eye-witness has great evidentiary value and unless compelling reasons exist, their statements are not to be discarded lightly: Supreme Court

Nobody can enter into the mind of the accused and his intention has to be ascertained from the weapon used, part of the body chosen for assault and the nature of the injury caused as upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court through the learned bench led by Justice M. R. Shah in the case of Sadakat Kotwar and Anr. v. The State of Jharkhand (CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1316 of 2021)

The brief facts of the case are that feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 01.07.2019 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.393 of 2004 by which the High Court has upheld the conviction of the appellants herein for the offences under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC, the original accused have preferred the present appeal.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court held “There are concurrent findings recorded by the courts below holding the appellants – original accused guilty which do not require any interference by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned Trial Court as well as the High Court. Now so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of this Court in Jai Narain Mishra and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar, (1971) 3 SCC 762 is concerned, on facts such decision shall not be applicable more particularly considering the subsequent decisions as well as the weapon used, nature of injuries caused on the vital part of the body. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the present appeal fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.”

Click here to read the Judgment

Judgment reviewed by Vandana Ragwani

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat