Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.28 seconds)Section 25 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 26 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 307 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 106 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
State Of West Bengal vs Vindu Lachmandas Sakhrani Alias Deru on 7 January, 1992
4. Mr.C.B. Gururaj, learned counsel for the appellants
would argue that since Section 302 is charged against four
Page 3 of 28
Criminal Appeal No.425 of 2014
accused read with Section 34, when one of the accused is
acquitted, it should inure to the benefit of the others also.
Reliance was placed on State of West Bengal v. Vindu
Lachmandas Sakhrani alias Deru1 and Suraj Pal v. State of
Uttar Pradesh2. The depositions were read over to us and it
was argued that the eye witnesses had turned hostile and
there was no circumstance bringing out the culpability of the
accused.
Babu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010
14. Absence of motive is not an imperative circumstance
to arrive at a conviction, in a case where there is ocular
evidence. The role of motive is not very significant even
when circumstances otherwise form an unbreakable chain.
Motive only provides another link, and the absence of
motive is a factor that weighs in favour of the accused as held
Page 10 of 28
Criminal Appeal No.425 of 2014
in Babu v. State of Kerala3. We cannot find a motive in this
case; of the financial transaction having led to the crime.
Further, the prosecution case is that the deceased was
summoned over telephone, to the house of A2, on the
pretext of repaying the loan. But even PW-18 has no case
that the deceased left the house on such a mission, after a
telephone call. There is also no clear evidence as to whether
the deceased returned to his home in the evening of that
day.