Sheikh Sintha Madhar @ Jaffer @ Sintha etc. & Anr Vs. State and another
|
Head Note
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 148 , Section 302 , Section 201 , Section 120-B
Conviction and sentence of the appellants for the offences punishable under - In challenge - A1 to A6 formed one group and hatched a conspiracy under the leadership of A1 and attacked the deceased with weapons in pursuance of the common object and caused his death at about 10 p.m. when he was returning back from his clinic - The statements of PW1 and PW65 are not contradictory to each other. Merely because PW65 did not see PW1 until the accused had left, does not mean that she was not present at the place of occurrence and she did not witness the occurrence - The first informant though had not named PW1 in the complaint such omission is not fatal in the face of otherwise cogent and convincing evidence of PW1, corroborated by PW65. PW1 identified all the seven accused appellants in the Court as well as in the TIP - The conspiracy before the incident is proved by the statements of PW23, PW36 and PW37 - the conviction of A1 to A6 is based on proper appreciation of evidence, however, A7's presence becomes doubtful, thus, he cannot be made liable for abetment to commit murder by A1 to A6 - The conviction and sentence of A1 to A6 confirmed, while, A7 is acquitted of all the charges - Appeals disposed.
Topic(s)-Murder - Conviction of A1 to A6 confirmed , while , A7 is acquitted