Chamtu Munda v. the State of Jharkhand
Case brief
What is this about?
In an appeal against conviction for murder, the High Court set aside the lower court's order due to lack of eyewitness evidence, failure to corroborate alleged extra judicial confession, and absence of recovered weapon.
What did the court decide?
Impugned judgment of conviction and sentence set aside; appellant directed to be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 871 of 2014
Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 06.09.2014 passed by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ghatsila in S.T. Case No. 283 of 2011.
Chamtu Munda ------Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ------Respondent
For the Appellant: Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sinha, Amicus Curiae For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, Additional Public Prosecutor
PRESENT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
Per Kailash Prasad Deo, J :
Heard, learned Amicus Curiae Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sinha and learned counsel for the State Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, Additional Public Prosecutor.
- The instant criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 06.09.2014 passed in S.T. Case No. 283/2011 passed by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ghatsila, whereby the sole appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offence committed and punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine, appellant has to serve further sentence of simple imprisonment for six months.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC can be sustained on uncorroborated extra judicial confession absent eyewitnesses and recovery of weapon.
Whether the prosecution proved presence of the accused at the place of crime and link between injuries and the weapon used.
Whether the findings of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Trial Court require interference by the Appellate Court.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Chamtu Munda
- respondent
The State of Jharkhand
Coram
Apareesh Kumar Singh
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Jharkhand HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- Cr.A(DB)/871/2014
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court