Search Results for "Sharad Birdichand Sarda"

19 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 19 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Acquits Appellant in Murder Conviction Appeal Due to Unreliable Circumstantial Evidence. Conviction Under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 Set Aside as Witnesses' Conduct Found Doubtful and Prosecution Failed to Establish Chain of Circumstantial Evidence.

The appeal arose from a conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Sessions Trial No.39...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Circumstantial Evidence and Unreliable Witnesses. Conviction under Section 302 r/w 120B IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The case involves two criminal appeals filed by Moreshwar Hanskar and Sewaklal Yede, original accused nos. 1 and 3, challenging their conviction under...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals Against Conviction for Kidnapping, Murder, Extortion, and Destruction of Evidence. Conviction based on circumstantial evidence including CDRs, extra-judicial confession, and last seen evidence upheld.

The case involved two appeals before the Bombay High Court against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, convicting the appel...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Murder and Kidnapping Based on Circumstantial Evidence and Last Seen Theory. Accused's Failure to Explain Disappearance of Deceased Leads to Guilt Under Sections 302, 364, 201 IPC.

The appellant, Bhimrao Bankar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur for the murder of his brother-in-law, Atul, under Section 302 IP...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Accused for Kidnapping, Rape, and Murder of Minor Girl Based on Circumstantial Evidence. Last Seen Theory and Failure to Explain Under Section 106 Evidence Act Confirm Guilt Under Sections 366A, 376(2)(f), 302 IPC.

The appellant, Vijay Babasaheb Nanavare, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik in Sessions Case No. 88 of 2006 for kidnapping a minor...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court at Goa Upholds Conviction of Appellants for Murder, Robbery, and Criminal Conspiracy in Brutal Killing of Woman. Circumstantial Evidence Including Last Seen Theory and Recovery of Stolen Articles Sufficient to Prove Guilt Under Sections 302, 394, 365, 201 read with 120-B IPC.

The case pertains to the brutal murder of a woman in Goa in October 2009. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, along with a co-accused and a j...