Can’t reject approver’s evidence if confirmed: Madras High Court
By Express News Service | Published: 01st April 2018 02:42 AM |
Last Updated: 01st April 2018 02:42 AM ||
Madras High Court (File | EPS)
CHENNAI: Holding that if the evidence of the approver is corroborated by other material particulars, the same cannot be eschewed merely because he had turned approver and supported the prosecution version, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court has upheld the life imprisonment awarded by a lower court to two other accused.
Sathishkumar, Soundararajan and Manikandan were arrested for offences under Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 302 (murder) of the IPC for murdering a woman in 2014 for gain.
During the framing of charges, Manikandan pleaded guilty and submitted an application to treat him as an approver by giving necessary pardon on November 7, 2014.
Accordingly, he was granted pardon by the trial court and he was examined as court witness on the prosecution’s side.
After procedure, charges were framed against Sathishkumar and Soundararajan.
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu in Kancheepuram district, convicted and sentenced the duo to life imprisonment. Hence, the present appeal contending that the evidence of the approver could not be relied upon.
Rejecting the contention, a Bench of Justices C T Selvam and N Sathish Kumar held on March 27 that it was of the considered view that the prosecution has clearly established the charges against the first two accused.
From every circumstance placed by the prosecution, the conspiracy charge had been clearly established against the accused. To prove the charge of conspiracy, direct evidence is always impossible. The said charge can be inferred from various circumstances.
However, in this case, apart from the circumstances, the evidence of the approver, coupled with the other corroborative evidence, established the charge against Sathishkumar and Soundararajan. Therefore, this court is of the view that the prosecution has proved all the circumstances beyond all reasonable doubt.
By Express News Service | Published: 01st April 2018 02:42 AM |
Last Updated: 01st April 2018 02:42 AM ||
Madras High Court (File | EPS)
CHENNAI: Holding that if the evidence of the approver is corroborated by other material particulars, the same cannot be eschewed merely because he had turned approver and supported the prosecution version, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court has upheld the life imprisonment awarded by a lower court to two other accused.
Sathishkumar, Soundararajan and Manikandan were arrested for offences under Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 302 (murder) of the IPC for murdering a woman in 2014 for gain.
During the framing of charges, Manikandan pleaded guilty and submitted an application to treat him as an approver by giving necessary pardon on November 7, 2014.
Accordingly, he was granted pardon by the trial court and he was examined as court witness on the prosecution’s side.
After procedure, charges were framed against Sathishkumar and Soundararajan.
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu in Kancheepuram district, convicted and sentenced the duo to life imprisonment. Hence, the present appeal contending that the evidence of the approver could not be relied upon.
Rejecting the contention, a Bench of Justices C T Selvam and N Sathish Kumar held on March 27 that it was of the considered view that the prosecution has clearly established the charges against the first two accused.
From every circumstance placed by the prosecution, the conspiracy charge had been clearly established against the accused. To prove the charge of conspiracy, direct evidence is always impossible. The said charge can be inferred from various circumstances.
However, in this case, apart from the circumstances, the evidence of the approver, coupled with the other corroborative evidence, established the charge against Sathishkumar and Soundararajan. Therefore, this court is of the view that the prosecution has proved all the circumstances beyond all reasonable doubt.
No comments:
Post a Comment