VIJAY KISHAN DHILLOD v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Discusses evaluation of evidence, child witness testimony, and admissibility of electronic evidence in a murder case.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-AUG:15846-DB
Decision Date: 24-06-2025
List of Laws
Indian Penal Code, 1860; The Maharashtra Prohibition Act; Indian Evidence Act, 1872
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: The judgment discusses Section 302 IPC, under which the appellant was convicted by the trial court for murder. The appeal challenges this conviction. The court analyzes the evidence to determine if the act constitutes murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder (potentially under Section 304 Part II IPC, as argued by the appellant's counsel). The court concludes that the appellant assaulted the deceased with predetermination using multiple articles, thus confirming guilt under Section 302 IPC. The judgment also mentions Section 304 Part II IPC, arguing that the act of the accused is not covered under this section. The appellant's counsel suggested that the act of the accused is covered under Section 304 Part II of the I.P.C. because there was a quarrel between the deceased and accused prior to the incident. The court rejected this argument.
- The Maharashtra Prohibition Act: The judgment mentions Section 85 (1) (2) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, under which the appellant/accused was also charged. However, the judgment does not delve into the specifics of this charge or its impact on the appeal's outcome.
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872: The judgment discusses Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act concerning the admissibility of electronic evidence, specifically CCTV footage. The appellant's counsel raised doubts about the admissibility of the CCTV footage due to the lack of a proper certificate under Section 65B. The court acknowledges the stringent technicalities attached to electronic evidence but states that even without the CCTV footage, there is sufficient evidence to uphold the conviction.
🔒 For Members Only