Tag: eyewitness testimony

A Landmark Ruling on Fair Trials: Supreme Court Issues New Guidelines for Video Conferencing and Witness Confrontation
4Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

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

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...
Read More
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case: Recovery of Weapon Alone is Not Proof
4Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case: Recovery of Weapon Alone is Not Proof

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, holding that the conviction under Section 302 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act was unsustainable. The Court ruled that the recovery of a firearm from a place accessible to others, without independent corroboration or proof it was the murder weapon, is insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Facts Of The Case: The case concerns the murder of Promila on June 12, 2016, in village M.P. Majra, Haryana. The First Information Report (FIR) was registered by her brother, Pradeep (PW-1), alleging that three unidentified men in a car shot her. Five days later, in a supplementary statement, Pradeep named the appellant, Govind, along with Sanoj and Amit, as the perpetrators. During the investigation, a country-made pistol and two live cart...
Read More
From Murder to Culpable Homicide: How the Supreme Court Reclassified a Stabbing Case
29Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

From Murder to Culpable Homicide: How the Supreme Court Reclassified a Stabbing Case

The Supreme Court reclassified the offense from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC. The Court held that while the appellant had the knowledge his act was likely to cause death, the prosecution failed to prove the requisite intention to kill, which is essential to constitute murder under Section 300 IPC. Facts Of The Case: On June 12, 1998, an altercation occurred between the appellant, Nandkumar, and his brother. Rajesh, the nephew of Louis Williams (the deceased), intervened, during which the appellant allegedly injured Rajesh with a knife. Later that night, the appellant went to the residence of Louis Williams. A further incident ensued, resulting in the appellant inflicting multiple stab wounds on Williams, including ...
Read More
Supreme Court Rules on Vicarious Liability in Group Assault Case
13Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules on Vicarious Liability in Group Assault Case

In this Supreme Court judgement, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of appellants under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC. The Court clarified that vicarious liability under Section 149 applies when a member of an unlawful assembly shares its common object, irrespective of direct commission of the fatal act. It upheld that active facilitation and participation in a coordinated attack establishes guilt. Facts Of The Case: On April 27, 1999, Ankush Gholap and others were returning from Bhor in a jeep when they were intercepted by six accused persons on two motorcycles. The accused, armed with weapons like knives and a sattur, stopped the jeep near Navi Ali. Accused no. 3 removed the jeep's keys and assaulted the driver, while the others dragged Ankush and two other occu...
Read More
Supreme Court Overturns Life Sentences, Grants Benefit of Doubt in 1990 Murder Case
2Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Overturns Life Sentences, Grants Benefit of Doubt in 1990 Murder Case

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused-appellant and three co-convicts, finding the prosecution's eyewitness testimonies wholly unreliable and contradictory regarding the genesis and location of the incident. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, warranting the benefit of doubt under Article 142 of the Constitution. Facts Of The Case: The case stems from an incident on 28th September 1990, where an altercation allegedly occurred in a village involving ten accused persons. According to the FIR lodged by Gobariya (PW-2), the incident began when the accused were damaging a temporary hutment belonging to Jagya (PW-3). Gobariya's son, Ramesh, intervened to pacify them, upon which the assailants allegedly turned on him and assaul...
Read More
The “Unlawful Assembly” Test: Supreme Court Explains When Mere Presence at a Crime Scene Isn’t Enough
4Dec By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

The “Unlawful Assembly” Test: Supreme Court Explains When Mere Presence at a Crime Scene Isn’t Enough

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies that mere presence in a crowd does not automatically constitute membership in an unlawful assembly under Section 149 IPC. To establish constructive liability, the prosecution must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that each accused shared the common object of the assembly, distinguishing active participants from passive bystanders. Conviction requires cogent and consistent evidence linking the individual to the assembly's objective. Facts Of The Case: On 20 November 1988, at around 8:00 AM, informant Jagdish Mahato (PW-20) and his brother Meghu Mahato went to inspect their settled agricultural land in Baharkhal, Bihar. They allegedly found a large mob of 400-500 persons from the neighboring village of Mahila, many armed with weapons like guns, spears, ...
Read More
Supreme Court Overturns Conviction, Stresses Need for Concrete Proof of Identity
29Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction, Stresses Need for Concrete Proof of Identity

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused, ruling that the prosecution failed to establish their identity as the perpetrators. The sole eyewitness could not identify them, and the testimonies of other witnesses were unreliable. Recovery of weapons was inadmissible as proof of their use in the crime under Sections 25-27 of the Evidence Act. Facts Of The Case: On June 3, 2000, an altercation occurred between appellants Rajendra Singh, his son Bhupender Singh, and Diler Singh after the appellants began digging Diler Singh's field. Later that day, at around 1:30 PM, Diler Singh's son, Pushpendra Singh (the deceased), was sitting at Jogither diversion. The three appellants arrived on a motorcycle, armed with swords and a 'kanta'. Upon seeing them, the deceased fled towards northern fields...
Read More
Use of Blunt Side of Weapons Key: Supreme Court Converts 302 IPC to 304 in Land Dispute Killing
27Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Use of Blunt Side of Weapons Key: Supreme Court Converts 302 IPC to 304 in Land Dispute Killing

The Supreme Court upheld the concurrent findings of the courts below on the appellants' involvement in causing the deaths. However, it altered the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part I IPC, finding that the act was done with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death, but without the intention to kill. The sentence already undergone was deemed sufficient. Facts Of The Case: On the morning of August 6, 1986, complainant Ram Gopal (PW-1) went with his father and two uncles to a river ghat to measure agricultural land for partition. There, they encountered the four accused appellants, including the owner of the adjacent land, Raghav Prashad. The accused, who were hiding, suddenly emerged and a dispute over the measurement ensued. This altercation quickly turned vi...
Read More
Inconsistent Evidence Leads to Claim Rejection, Rules Supreme Court in Reliance Insurance Case
22Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Inconsistent Evidence Leads to Claim Rejection, Rules Supreme Court in Reliance Insurance Case

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing that a claim petition under motor accident law must be established on a preponderance of probability. However, this standard is not met when the foundational evidence, including the FIR and eyewitness testimony, is found to be unreliable, unsubstantiated, and creates valid suspicion regarding the occurrence of the accident itself. Facts Of The Case: On June 18, 2014, the deceased, husband of the first appellant, was allegedly involved in a hit-and-run road accident at Singasandra crossroad. The accident was claimed to be witnessed by PW2, a neighbour, who testified that the driver of the offending vehicle abandoned the victim's body after promising to take him to a hospital. The wife of the deceased (PW1) was informed by P...
Read More
How Unexplained Injuries and a Family Dispute Led to an Acquittal by the Supreme Court
9Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

How Unexplained Injuries and a Family Dispute Led to an Acquittal by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, granting the benefit of doubt. The conviction was overturned due to material inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, including an unexplained timeline of death, unrebutted defence evidence of family enmity, and a lack of medical corroboration for the alleged weapon and dying declaration. Facts Of The Case: Based on the altercation, the appellant and her husband were accused of fatally beating the deceased with sticks near a temple later that night. The prosecution's case, supported by eyewitnesses including the deceased's father (PW-7), was that the attack was retaliation for the afternoon dispute. The victim was allegedly carried home unconscious and died minutes later, with a First Information Report (FIR) lodged around 9:00 PM. How...
Read More