Raghuveer Singh and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Tags Bail

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Criminal Appeal, 35 of 2007, Judgment Date: May 18, 2018

Law laid down -

(1) Where witnesses make inconsistent statements in their evidence either at one stage or at two stages, testimony of such witnesses become unreliable and unworthy of credence and in absence of special circumstances, no conviction can be based on the evidence of such witnesses.

(2) Material improvements of version of eye-witness from FIR to the version given in the Court, said evidence cannot be taken into consideration.

(3) Failure on part of investigating agency to recover any bloodstained clothes from the deceased, accused or from the incident or taking bloodstained soil and bloodstains found over the weapon to match blood group and failure to send for chemical or serology examination, render the case of prosecution doubtful.

(4) Common object shared by members of the assembly must pre-exist the occurrence of incident. When whole fight started suddenly on the spur of the moment in a heat of passion the accused though more than five in number, could only be liable for the individual acts committed by them and could not be convicted under Sections 149, 148 or 147 of IPC.

(5) If necessary ingredients of exception -4 of Section 300 of IPC i.e. sudden fight, absence of premeditation, single blow and no undue advantage or cruelty shown in the case, then the offence of Section 302 of IPC can be altered to Section 304 (Part I or II as the case may be) of IPC.

Raghuveer Singh and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Back to Judgments