Prakash v. State Rep.by
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court dismissed an appeal against life imprisonment and three-year sentence for murder (IPC 302) and theft (IPC 404). Court relied on circumstantial evidence, missing gold ornaments, and fingerprints.
What did the court decide?
Conviction and sentence of life imprisonment and fine under Sections 302 and 404 IPC were confirmed.
What the court decided
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.08.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Criminal Appeal No.348 of 2015
Prakash .. Appellant vs State rep by Inspector of Police, Mettupalayam Police Station, Coimbatore District.
(Cr.No.464 of 2012) .. Respondent
Prayer:- Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Mahila Court), Coimbatore in S.C.No.271 of 2013 dated 27.02.2015.
For Appellants : Mr.John Sathyan
For Respondent : Mr.E.Raja
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prosecution circumstantial evidence, including missing jewels and fingerprints, establishes the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the conviction and life imprisonment sentence imposed by the trial court are sustainable in view of the evidence.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Prakash
- respondent
State
Coram
S.Nagamuthu
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court