Durga v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal against a murder conviction. The court upheld the reliability of the sole eyewitness and rejected challenges regarding FIR timing and stomach content evidence, holding that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
What did the court decide?
The criminal appeal is dismissed; the appellant is directed to remain in jail.
What the court decided
(Judgement reserved on 24.7.2019) (Judgement delivered on 16.8.2019)
Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1957 of 1986
Appellant :- Durga Respondent :- State Counsel for Appellant :- Deepak Kumar,Kashif Zaidi Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
(Delivered by Hon.Pankaj Naqvi,J)
This criminal appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 16.7.1986 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.VIII, Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No.228 of 1985 (Case Crime No.89 of 1985) convicting the appellant for life under Section 302 IPC.
The case of prosecution in brief is that the informant and the deceased were brothers, had a shop situate near a particular crossing, around which there was illumination on account of shops and the road. On 20.3.85 at about 8.30 PM while the duo was present at the shop alongwith one Om Prakash and his associate who had come to settle the accounts with the deceased. Accused-appellant Durga Nai, earlier a resident of Lal colony arrived, fired a shot from his country made pistol at the deceased and also threatened that
2
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction of the appellant for murder under Section 302 IPC is sustainable despite the appellant's challenge regarding the timing of the FIR and medical evidence.
Whether the conduct of the solitary eyewitness P.W.-2 in lodging an FIR at the police station instead of rushing the victim to the hospital renders his testimony unreliable.
Whether the plea of false implication supported by probability without cogent evidence can succeed against reliable ocular evidence.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Durga
- respondent
State
Coram
Pankaj Naqvi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLA/1957/1986
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court