Law:

Section:

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 392 & 34---Robbery, common intention---Reappraisal of evidence---Prosecution witnesses not implicating the accused---Conviction nonetheless--- Effect--- Presumptive, speculative and conjectural appreciation of evidence by courts below---Accused and co-accused were alleged to have hired a motorcar from the complainant and subsequently snatched the same---Motor car was recovered from a different city---Accused was convicted under Ss. 392 & 34, P.P.C., and sentenced to three years' imprisonment with a fine of Rs.20,000---Appeal filed by accused before the Sessions Court was dismissed---Revision petition filed before the High Court was also dismissed---Validity---Complainant, who was the only eyewitness of the robbery, appeared as a prosecution witness and categorically stated before the Trial Court that accused was not one of the persons who had snatched away the motorcar from him, and was completely innocent in the matter---Other prosecution witnesses, including witness of recovery made statements before the Trial Court to the effect that accused was innocent and that he had not committed any offence; that the stolen motorcar had not been recovered from physical possession of the accused, and that at the time of the alleged recovery accused was merely present in the street wherefrom the stolen motorcar had been recovered---All said statements made by different prosecution witnesses before the Trial Court had gone a long way in establishing that the prosecution had utterly and miserably failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt---Supreme Court observed that Judge-in-Chamber of the High Court had clearly referred to the different aspects of the case but despite that the Judge-in-Chamber had concluded in favour of the prosecution, which conclusion was presumptive, speculative and conjectural at best; that in the circumstances of the present case no reasonable court could have arrived at such a conclusion and that such conclusion was possible only when the settled legal principles governing appreciation of evidence in criminal cases were applied inversely and the facts of the present case were…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492