Prosecution Must Explain Injuries Found On Deceased, Fanciful Thinking Not Basis To Arrive At Conclusions In Criminal Case
Case: Ganta Narender v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Coram: Justice K. Surender
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No.1362 OF 2008
Court Observation: “Assumptions, presumptions and fanciful thinking cannot be made basis to arrive at conclusions in a criminal case. Prosecution witnesses P.Ws.4 and 5 have stated that when they were playing in front of the house of the deceased, the deceased was washing cloths and subsequently by 10.00 a.m, went inside and closed doors. Further, there was no one in the house except the deceased. It is not in dispute that door was forced open to get the deceased out and she was laid in the verandah.”
Previous Posts
Money Decree/Certificate Of Recovery In Favour Of Financial Creditor Gives Fresh Cause Of Action To Initiate CIRP U/s 7 IBC: Supreme Court Download Judgement
Keywords
Injuries Found On Deceased, Conclusions In Criminal Case, Prosecution Must Explain
Related Articles
- Telangana HC Reduces Sentence Of POCSO Accused, Says Minor’s Understanding Of Rape Must Be Considered Before Relying On Sole Testimony For Conviction
- Drugs & Cosmetics Act: Complainant Must Prove “Exclusive Possession” Of Premises By Accused From Where Recovery Is Made: Telangana High Court
- Merely Lodging Cruelty FIR Against Husband Not Grounds for Divorce: Telangana High Court

