Circumstantial evidence
44 judgments tagged with this keyword in the official report. Filter or search within these · Subject index
-
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act. An appeal against the said conviction was dismissed by the High Court…
-
Nilesh Baburao Gitte v. State of Maharashtra
Appellant was convicted for matricide-killing of one’s own mother. By the present appeal, the appellant calls in question the correctness of the judgment of the High Court.
-
Nazim & Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand
Whether the prosecution has succeeded in establishing, beyond a reasonable doubt, a complete chain of circumstances leading only to the conclusion of guilt of the Appellants, or whether the circumstances leave room for reasonable…
-
Nagamma @ Nagarathna & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka
In the instant case, whether the motive projected and the crime has been proved and whether the circumstances lead to the culpability of the accused.
-
Thammineni Bhaskar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 364 and 201 IPC for kidnapping and murder of the informant’s son.
-
Akhtar Ali @ Ali Akhtar @ Shamim @ Raja Ustad v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the conviction of the appellants, as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, deserves to be upheld or whether they are entitled to acquittal.
-
Putai v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The accused-appellants were convicted for the offences punishable u/ss.376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of Penal Code, 1860. The High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction preferred by the accused-appellants.
-
Neelam Kumari v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Whether the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s.302, IPC for the murder of her infant son ought to be set aside.
-
Shail Kumari v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the conviction, as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court was totally based on conjectures and surmises; whether the conviction of the appellant u/s.302 IPC is sustainable in law.
-
Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamilnadu
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for offence punishable u/ss.302, 376 and 397 IPC.
-
Kum. Shubha @ Shubhashankar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the conviction of the appellants by the High Court u/s.302 read with s.120-B, IPC and additionally, s.201, IPC for A-4 alone, is justified.
-
Vaibhav v. The State of Maharashtra
In a case based on circumstantial evidence where there were missing links in the chain of circumstances, whether the finding of the High Court regarding the conviction of the appellant for offences u/ss.302, 201 r/w s.34, Penal…
-
Chetan v. The State of Karnataka
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 304 IPC, and u/ss.3, 5 of the Arms Act, 1959.
-
Padman Bibhar v. State of Odisha
Whether appellant can be convicted only on the basis of evidence on ‘last seen together’.
-
Ramkirat Munilal Goud v. State of Maharashtra Etc.
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for causing rape and murder of a child aged 3 years and 9 months.
-
Subhash Aggarwal v. The State of NCT of Delhi
Filicide or suicide is the vexing question in the instant case where a father was tried and convicted u/s.302 of the Penal Code, 1860 r/w. s.25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
-
State of Rajasthan v. Chatra
Whether the High Court erred in reversing the conviction of the respondent-accused under Section 376, Penal Code, 1860 for the rape of a minor girl and acquitting him.
-
Karandeep Sharma @ Razia @ Raju v. State of Uttarakhand
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant-accused for the kidnapping, rape/sexual assault and murder of a minor is sustainable.
-
The State of Chattisgarh v. Ashok Bhoi Etc.
Whether the High Court was justified in allowing the criminal appeal preferred by accused-respondent and dismissing acquittal appeal preferred by the State, thereby acquitting both the accused persons.
-
Manoj Rameshlal Chhabriya v. Mahesh Prakash Ahuja & Anr.
What are the parameters that a High Court should keep in mind while granting or refusing a leave to appeal filed under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C.
-
Md. Bani Alam Mazid @ Dhan v. State of Assam
In a case where the appellant alongwith a co-accused was alleged to have kidnapped and murdered the minor daughter of PW1, the issues for consideration were: (i) Whether the chain of circumstantial evidence based on which the…
-
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Balveer Singh
Does the Evidence Act, 1872 prescribe any particular age as a determinative factor to treat a witness to be a competent witness; Does the Evidence Act treat evidence of a child on the same footing as any other witness; Before the…
-
Ravi v. The State of Punjab
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court convicting the appellant-husband for the murder of his wife.
-
Hansraj v. State of Chhattisgarh
The appellant was convicted for offence u/s.302 IPC. Whether the appellant can be held guilty of the commission of offence beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Raja Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances leading to the guilt of the appellant-accused, beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Ramu Appa Mahapatar v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether on the strength of the evidence of the four witnesses, the appellant-accused can be linked with the offence; whether it can be said that the charge against the accused of committing murder of the deceased stood…
-
Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap v. The State of Maharashtra
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for rape and murder of the deceased and imposition of death sentence.
-
Gambhir Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Matter pertains to the sustainability of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of conviction and death sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court.
-
Thammaraya and Another v. The State of Karnataka
Whether the conviction of the appellants-accused under Sections 201 and 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable.
-
Abdul Nassar v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Whether the prosecution has proved by leading clinching and convincing circumstantial evidence that the accused had committed forcible and violent sexual assault on the child victim and, thereafter, strangled and killed her.
-
Vijaya Singh & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the Criminal Appeal filed by the Appellants challenging the conviction under Section 302/201 IPC can be entertained in the facts and circumstances of the case.
-
Karakkattu Muhammed Basheer v. The State of Kerala
Issue as regards sustainability of the order of conviction and sentence of the accused, when the case not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the accused.
-
Uma & Anr. v. The State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police
Whether the High Court was able to demonstrate perversity and non-appreciation of the materials on record by the Trial Court while reversing its finding of acquittal.
-
Vishwajeet Kerba Masalkar v. State of Maharashtra
Whether the conviction of the appellant and the death sentence awarded for the alleged murders of his wife, daughter and mother were justified.
-
Vijay Singh @ Vijay Kr. Sharma v. The State of Bihar
Issue arose as regards sustainablility of the findings of the High Court holding the appellants guilty of commission of offences u/ss. 302/34 and 364/34 IPC; as also the approach of the High Court, if in line with the settled law…
-
Santosh @ Rajesh @ Gopal v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Evidence provided by the prosecution, if sufficient to secure a conviction of the appellant for the murder of the victim.
-
Sukhpal Singh v. NCT of Delhi
Appellant was convicted u/s.302, Penal Code, 1860 for the murder of his wife. Courts below whether justified in holding that the statement of Complainant-PW-1 recorded in proceedings u/s.299, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973…
-
Ravishankar Tandon v. State of Chhattisgarh
In a case based on circumstantial evidence wherein the appellants-accused persons were convicted u/s.302 r/w s.34, ss.120B and 201, s.302 r/w ss.34 and 120B, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life, whether the prosecution was…
-
Ballu @ Balram @ Balmukund and Another v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
High Court whether justified in reversing the acquittal of the appellant Nos.1 and 2 and convicting them u/ss.302 and 201/34 and ss.302/34 and 201, Penal Code, 1860 respectively and sentencing accordingly; whether the prosecution…
-
Kumar @ Shiva Kumar v. State of Karnataka
Appellant was convicted for the offence u/s. 306 IPC by the trial Court and the conviction was upheld by the High Court. Whether the prosecution proved the charge of abetment to commit suicide u/s. 306 IPC against the appellant.