Posted on: May 4, 2024 Posted by: admin Comments: 0

Author: Siddhant Nayak, Student at KIIT School of Law, KIIT University


In the Case of Bodhraj V. State of Jammu Kashmir, the accused faced a criminal trial in which the prosecution charged them with some serious offences. The accused and the deceased were last seen together, and when the deceased was discovered dead, it was determined that no one other than the accused could have been responsible for the crime. To secure a conviction, the prosecution had to establish a chain of events that connected the accused to the crime beyond simply being seen together. Out of two, one Rambrash (BodhRaj) was convicted by the Trial Court for life in prison for Murder and other related charges but Bechan Ram was acquitted. The prosecution described how Rambraksh went to the deceased’s home, persuaded him to go to Ambikapur, and then accompanied him to field where the deceased disappeared. The deceased’s remains were eventually discovered, prompting a police investigation that included the recovery of several items from the crime scene. The prosecution used circumstantial evidence to prove the accused’s guilt, emphasising the significance of a complete chain of evidence that leaves no reasonable doubt about the accused’s participation in the crime.

Leave a Comment