The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the accused need not be under formal arrest for the purpose of statement given under s.27 Evidence Act, this was seen in the case of ASHUTOSH KAITHWAS VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (CRIMINAL APPEAL No.515 OF 2011), which was presided over by Justices Sujoy Paul and P.C. Gupta.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The appellant was held guilty for committing offence under Section 302 of IPC for murdering his room-mate in 2007, Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no eye-witness to the incident, The case of prosecution is based on His conviction was based on circumstantial evidence as well as his statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, last seen evidence, recovery of dead body, weapon and stones etc. It was also contended that the Prosecution had failed to establish motive before the trial court. It was further asserted that there were several convictions be set aside.
The Appellant submitted that his conviction was primarily based on the theory of “last seen together”. It was further pointed out that the Prosecution had also heavily relied on his testimony under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
JUDGEMENT OF THE CASE
In view of foregoing analysis, the prosecution has established its case beyond reasonable doubt. In the considered judgment, the court below has appreciated the evidence on legal parameters and same is not based on any surmises and conjectures.
The prosecution has established the chain of 14 circumstances with utmost clarity and accuracy.
No ingredients are available on which interference of this Court is warranted.
The Court noted that the Prosecution had established their case beyond reasonable doubt. It further held that no ingredients were available on which its interference in the decision of the trial court was warranted and accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VYSHNAVI KRISHNAN.
