Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 324,337-A(2),337-F(2),365-B,376,34

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 324, 337-A(2), 337-F(2), 365-B, 376 & 34---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-mudihah, ghayr-jaifah-badiah, kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage etc., rape, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that accused persons after trespassing into the house started be labouring the mother of complainant---Accused caused injuries by giving danda blows on the head of mother of complainant---Accused persons also forcibly abducted the wife of complainant by boarding her on a car---Accused persons also stole away 11 tola gold ornaments, cash of Rs. 1,20,000/- stitched and unstitched clothes and mobile phone---Ocular account in the present case had been furnished by four witnesses including complainant and victim---Record showed that Trial Court had passed conviction against the accused-appellants while believing the statement of injured mother of complainant---Cross-examination upon her could not have been conducted on account of her non-exposure, on any of the dates, before her death, in court---Crucial question emerged as to whether the conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court through its impugned solely on the basis of a statement/examination-in-chief of a witness without affording any opportunity of cross-examination over the witness to the defence, would be sustainable or not---Trial Court had disbelieved the entire ocular account furnished by witnesses including victim and complainant and acquitted appellants and their co-accused of the charge under Ss. 364-B & 376, P.P.C. which offences were graver in terms of entailing greater punishment---Discarding and non-reliance by the Trial Court upon such evidence also shed its adverse implications overall on the case of the prosecution---Remaining evidence relied upon by the Trial Court was examination-in-chief of injured mother of complainant, which in absence of giving a fair opportunity of conducting cross-examination, being inadmissible in evidence, could not be relied upon for maintaining and upholding the impugned conviction by High Court---Trial Court had proceeded to hold, both the…

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