STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. versus MANOJ KUMAR AND ANR.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. versus MANOJ KUMAR AND ANR.

Testimony of sole eyewitness, corroborated by circumstantial evidence, is sufficient for conviction under Section 302 IPC. Delay in FIR was satisfactorily explained and does not vitiate the case. Accused's repeated attempts and intentional action support charge of murder rather than lesser offence.

Parties
Appellant: State of Haryana; Respondent: Manoj Kumar; Petitioner: Col. Ajit Singh Saharan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 November 1993
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Acquittal by High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence restored
Legal Topics
Murder, Testimony of Sole Eyewitness, Delay in FIR Lodging, Classification Under IPC Section 302 Vs 304

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Haryana

Appellant

Manoj Kumar

Respondent

Col. Ajit Singh Saharan

Petitioner

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Acquittal by High Court

  1. 1 Whether conviction can be based on testimony of sole eyewitness
  2. 2 Effect of delay in lodging FIR on the prosecution case
  3. 3 Whether facts support conviction under Section 302 or 304 of IPC

Ratio Decidendi

Testimony of sole eyewitness, corroborated by circumstantial evidence, is sufficient for conviction under Section 302 IPC. Delay in FIR was satisfactorily explained and does not vitiate the case. Accused's repeated attempts and intentional action support charge of murder rather than lesser offence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence restored

Orders

  • Accused Manoj Kumar convicted under Section 302 IPC; sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life.
  • Accused to surrender within one week; authorities to take him into custody if he does not surrender.