Rise of Justice: Laxminath v. State of India

In a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India, the case of Laxminath v. State of India has seen justice prevail. The accused, Laxminath, was found guilty and convicted for the unfortunate demise of the deceased. The verdict showcases the commitment of the Indian legal system towards upholding truth and justice.


  • The informant, PW-1, heard his wife and daughter-in-law shouting that the accused had killed the deceased
  • Accused Laxminath attacked his son with an axe, resulting in the son’s death
  • The wife of PW-1 and mother of the deceased witnessed the attack and raised an alarm
  • Daughter-in-law of the deceased was also present during the incident but did not witness the attack directly
  • There was a dispute over land between the deceased and the accused, which may have been the motive for the crime
  • The Trial Court found RLC guilty and convicted him
  • RLC was sentenced to life imprisonment
  • The verdict was based on the evidence and arguments presented during the trial

Also Read: Enforcement of Foreign Award: Case of Oscar Investments Limited and RHC Holding Private Limited


  • The investigation into the death of Kursan revealed that he died due to blows from an axe.
  • There was a contention that the axe used was not sent for forensic examination.
  • The cross-examination of witnesses was primarily focused on recording their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
  • Contradictions were noted in the statements of witnesses, particularly regarding the construction dispute initially mentioned in the FIR.
  • Witness statements indicated a discrepancy on whether the construction was on the complainant’s land.
  • Contradictory testimonies were presented by witnesses PW-4 and PW-1 regarding the accused’s confession at the Panchayat.
  • The medical evidence supported the witness statements regarding the injuries found on the deceased.
  • Only five witnesses were examined during the trial, and it was established that the death was homicidal without much dispute.
  • The Investigating Officer (PW-6) provided evidence on the recovery of the axe and the accused’s statement.
  • Witnesses who saw the accused armed with an axe entering and leaving the room were not discredited, as their testimonies were deemed credible by the Trial Court.
  • Absence of merit in the case due to lack of evidence regarding the injury being caused by an axe
  • Lack of cross-examination on the recovery of the axe as stated by the investigating officer
  • The prosecution has successfully proven its case beyond reasonable doubt based on the statements of key witnesses
  • Investigating officer’s lapse in not subjecting the recovered axe to cross-examination acknowledged
  • Doctor’s statement supports the prosecution’s case

Also Read: NGOs Substantial Financing Case: Supreme Court’s Judgment on Public Authority Definition


  • Original names are to be used instead of Respondent No 1 or Petitioner No 1.
  • The appeal has been dismissed.

Also Read: Maintenance Rights of Divorced Women: Reconsideration Plea by Mr. Debal Banerjee


Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000331-000331 / 2011

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *