Bharat Sahu v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court allowed appeal by convicted appellant against murder conviction. Court held prosecution failed to prove case beyond reasonable doubt as circumstantial evidence was not complete and Section 164 statements were not substantive evidence. Appellant acquitted.
What did the court decide?
Judgment of conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted and set at liberty. Appellant on bail and bonds cancelled.
What the court decided
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA; CUTTACK
CRA NO.253 0F 2000
From the judgment and order of conviction dated 07.9.2000 passed by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Cuttack in S.T. Case No.494/1996.
----------Bharat Sahu … Appellant Versus
State of Orissa … Respondent
----------For Appellant : M/s. Sangram Rath (Amicus Curiae)
For Respondent : M/s. G.N.Rout, Addl. Standing Counsel.
------------ P R E S E N T:
SHRI JUSTICE S.K.MISHRA
AND MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Date of Hearing & Judgment: 9h February, 2021
S.K.Mishra,J . The sole appellant calls in question his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the “Penal Code” for brevity) and sentence of
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt based on circumstantial evidence and statements recorded under Section 164 CrPC.
Whether the absence of the accused and recovery of body form a complete chain of circumstances pointing to guilt.
Whether convictions can be sustained on the basis of statements under Section 164 CrPC recorded before a Magistrate.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Bharat Sahu
- respondent
State of Orissa
Coram
S.K. Mishra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court