Ramprakash Rajagopal

793 Articles
Acquittal

A cryptic order rejecting the prolonged incarceration (22 years) for premature release is quashed [Supreme Court quoted Plato’s advice]

pocso
Acquittal

Acquittal: POCSO: Not conducting a potency test on the accused along with the negative DNA report and lack of eyewitness to the incident creates suspicion about the prosecution’s case

common intention
Acquittal

Section 34 IPC: Evidence on record falls short of establishing either a prior meeting of minds hence mere presence is insufficient to convict the accused with the aid of Section 34 IPC

death sentence
3 judge bench

Death Penalty: Supreme Court direct the High Court and States to render skilled and adequate resourced legal representation

test identification parade
BNS

Appellant made total denial in his s.313 Cr.P.C statement which is contrary to he fact that he has been admitted in care hospital and no explanation to this denial lead to possession of poision

156
Acquittal

No Second Section 156(3) CrPC Petition After Closure of Preliminary Inquiry remedy lies only under section 200 CrPC

Investigation
Acquittal

Faulty investigation: Though the police officer reached the spot immediately based on the telephone information but did not follow the investigation procedures resulting in prosecution of 16 persons

dying declarations
Acquittal

Though there are variations in the two dying declarations the second dying declaration is found more believable and witnesses did not state many facts in their 161 statements

bail
Acquittal

Court must balance State’s interest and accused’s fundamental right to liberty and should not reject the A.B based on mere A.G or P.P’s statement on offence

complaint and bail
Ad. Ramprakash Rajagopal

Obtain Bail or Anticipatory Bail in Complaint cases or Go Inside

complaint bail
Acquittal

Complaint case: Police cannot arrest in complaint cases without an order of arrest u/s 87 Cr.P.C from the court

eye-witness
BNS

Murder case: The eyewitness testimony is trusted more than the doctor’s testimony because eye-witness survived cross-examination