Tag: Acquittal

Quality Over Quantity: Supreme Court Reiterates a Single Witness Must Be “Wholly Reliable” to Convict
8Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Quality Over Quantity: Supreme Court Reiterates a Single Witness Must Be “Wholly Reliable” to Convict

This Supreme Court judgment reiterates the established legal principle governing convictions based on circumstantial evidence, as outlined in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda. The Supreme Court held that the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances that unequivocally points to the guilt of the accused, excluding every other reasonable hypothesis. The conviction was overturned as the sole witness's testimony was found to be unreliable and improved, failing to meet this standard of proof. Facts Of The Case: On October 11, 2003, Santosh Kumar Pandey (PW-2), a shop owner, observed the appellant, Shail Kumari, walking in a disordered condition towards Pujari Talab, a nearby water body, with her two young children. Growing suspicious, he asked a rickshaw puller to foll...
Read More
No Set Formula for Human Reaction: Supreme Court Backs Parents Who Fled Fire That Killed Kids
8Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

No Set Formula for Human Reaction: Supreme Court Backs Parents Who Fled Fire That Killed Kids

The Supreme Court ruled that the High Court erred in its appreciation of evidence, particularly witness testimony and circumstantial evidence. It upheld the trial court's conviction, establishing that the prosecution successfully proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that witness conduct cannot be judged by a uniform standard of reaction. Facts Of The Case: The case stems from a tragic incident on the intervening night of April 1-2, 1992, in Khunti, where the informant, Santosh Kumar Singh, his wife, and their two infant daughters were asleep. The prosecution's case was that accused persons Nilu Ganjhu and Md. Mahboob Ansari, motivated by a business rivalry with the informant over his bus agency operation, threatened him weeks prior. That night, an explosive substance was used, c...
Read More
Chain of Circumstances Broken: Supreme Court Frees Accused in Landmark Circumstantial Evidence Ruling
8Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Chain of Circumstances Broken: Supreme Court Frees Accused in Landmark Circumstantial Evidence Ruling

This Supreme Court judgment acquits the accused based on the prosecution's failure to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence as mandated by Sharad Birdhichand Sarda. The court found the evidence regarding motive, last seen, extra-judicial confessions, and recoveries to be unreliable, contradictory, and insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Facts Of The Case: The case involves the murder of Balwant, whose body was discovered in a waterworks tank in Hisar on December 23, 1997. His father, Har Nath (PW-11), identified the body and filed a complaint, leading to an FIR. The prosecution alleged that the accused—Shanti Devi, her son Rajbir, and Veena—murdered Balwant due to a property dispute, as Shanti Devi was a tenant in his house, and an illicit relatio...
Read More
Supreme Court Acquits Man: “Confession to Police” Cannot Be Used as Evidence
6Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Man: “Confession to Police” Cannot Be Used as Evidence

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused, holding that a confessional FIR made to a police officer is wholly inadmissible as evidence under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The prosecution failed to prove its case with legally admissible evidence, rendering the medical and other evidence insufficient for conviction. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Narayan Yadav, himself lodged an FIR at Korba Kotwali Police Station on 27.09.2019, confessing to the murder of Ram Babu Sharma. In the FIR, he stated that a quarrel ensued at the deceased's residence after the latter made an obscene remark upon seeing a photograph of the appellant's girlfriend. In a fit of rage, the appellant claimed he picked up a vegetable knife and inflicted injuries on the deceased, later also hitting him with...
Read More
Technicality or Right? Supreme Court Acquits Man, Rules Mandatory NDPS Procedures Were Ignored
5Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Technicality or Right? Supreme Court Acquits Man, Rules Mandatory NDPS Procedures Were Ignored

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay, particularly when the appellant was incarcerated. On merits, the Court acquitted the accused due to fatal procedural lapses: non-compliance with mandatory sampling guidelines under Standing Order No. 1 of 1989 and Section 52A of the NDPS Act, which rendered the seizure and FSL report unreliable. The trial court also erred in clubbing separate recoveries to constitute commercial quantity without evidence of conspiracy under Section 29. Facts Of The Case: On July 16, 2018, based on source information, police apprehended the appellant, Nadeem Ahamed, and a co-accused, Amit Dutta, near Laxmi Store in Kolkata. A search, conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, led to the recovery o...
Read More
Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal: Doubtful Dying Declaration Cannot Secure Murder Conviction
26Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal: Doubtful Dying Declaration Cannot Secure Murder Conviction

The Supreme Court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the well-settled principle that an appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the findings are perverse and the only possible view is of guilt. The Court found the prosecution's evidence, particularly the dying declaration, unreliable due to material contradictions and the victim's precarious medical condition, making the case fit for the application of the benefit of doubt. Facts Of The Case: Based on the accusation of Poona Bai (PW-10), the prosecution's case was that on March 10, 2003, the accused-respondent, Ramveer Singh, forcibly entered their house and set her granddaughter, Badami Bai, on fire by pouring kerosene on her. The alleged motive was retaliation for a rape complaint filed against the accused's son by...
Read More
DNA Mishandling Leads to Acquittal: Supreme Court Criticizes Investigation in Brutal Murder Case
11Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

DNA Mishandling Leads to Acquittal: Supreme Court Criticizes Investigation in Brutal Murder Case

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused in a double murder and rape case, ruling that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court highlighted critical lapses, including unreliable circumstantial evidence, mishandled DNA samples, an improperly conducted Test Identification Parade, and lack of motive. It emphasized strict adherence to forensic protocols and reaffirmed that circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain pointing solely to the accused’s guilt. The judgment underscored the prosecution’s burden to ensure a fair investigation and maintain evidentiary integrity. Facts Of The Case: In May 2011, two young victims—Ezhil Muthalvan (D1) and Kasturi (D2)—were found brutally murdered near Suruli Falls in Tamil Nadu. D1 had left home under the prete...
Read More
Supreme Court Overturns Conviction Under Section 306 IPC: Limits on High Court’s Revisional Powers
16Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

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

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...
Read More
Accidental Death or Murder? Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling in the Medical Student Case
16Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Accidental Death or Murder? Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling in the Medical Student Case

The Supreme Court partially set aside the appellant's conviction under Section 302 IPC and Section 5 read with 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act, acquitting him of these charges. The Court found the circumstantial evidence inconsistent with a murder conviction, noting a reasonable possibility of accidental death supported by medical evidence and bullet trajectory. His conviction under Section 201 IPC (disappearance of evidence) was sustained, and he was sentenced to the period already undergone. The judgment emphasized that mere suspicion, or an accused's inability to explain circumstances, cannot substitute for the prosecution proving its case beyond reasonable doubt, especially when a probable counter-view exists. Facts Of The Case: Vaibhav and Mangesh, first-year homeopathy medical college s...
Read More
Affidavits & Fair Trial: Why the Supreme Court Overturned a Murder Conviction
12Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Affidavits & Fair Trial: Why the Supreme Court Overturned a Murder Conviction

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellants, setting aside their conviction under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC, due to serious doubts about the prosecution's case. The investigation was deemed unfair because the investigating officer suppressed affidavits from three eyewitnesses (PW-5, PW-6, PW-7) that favored the accused, and failed to conduct further investigation based on these affidavits. The Court found it unsafe to convict solely on PW-4's testimony given the suppressed material. Facts Of The Case: Sakhawat and Mehndi, appellant nos. 1 and 2 respectively, appealed a judgment from the High Court of Allahabad dated October 9, 2018, which upheld their conviction for offenses under Section 302 and Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I...
Read More