1860 - The Legal Chamber

The Supreme Court of India acquitted the appellant, primarily on the ground that the dock identification of the accused by the sole injured eyewitness, recorded via video conferencing after an inordinate delay of over eight years, was deemed unsafe and unreliable. The Court found the testimony suffered from material improvements and inconsistencies, and the recoveries were not conclusively linked to the crime. Consequently, the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Facts Of The Case: In the intervening night of 2nd/3rd November 2008, five assailants broke into the Delhi residence of Madan Mohan Gulati and his wife, Indra Prabha Gulati (PW-18). The intruders assaulted the elderly couple, resulting in Madan Mohan's death and serious injuries to Indra Prabha. The poli...

The Supreme Court of India, in Nagarajan v. State of Tamil Nadu, held that in an appeal filed by an accused against conviction, the High Court cannot suo motu exercise revisional powers to enhance the sentence or convict on a charge for which the trial court acquitted the accused, especially when no appeal or revision was filed by the State, victim, or complainant. The Court emphasized the principle of no reformatio in peius, meaning an appellant should not be placed in a worse position as a result of filing an appeal Facts Of The Case: Nagarajan, the appellant, was the neighbor of the deceased, Mariammal. On the night of July 11, 2003, the appellant entered Mariammal's room, hugged her, and attempted to outrage her modesty. Mariammal's mother-in-law intervened, scolded the appel...

Tag: 1860

A Landmark Ruling on Fair Trials: Supreme Court Issues New Guidelines for Video Conferencing and Witness Confrontation

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction Under Section 306 IPC: Limits on High Court’s Revisional Powers