FIR - The Legal Chamber

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...

Supreme Court Clarifies When Courts Can Summon New Accused During Trial Section 319 CrPC

The Supreme Court clarified the legal principles governing the exercise of power under Section 319 of the CrPC, emphasizing that it can be invoked based on evidence collected during trial, even if the person was not charge-sheeted. The Court held that the standard for summoning an additional accused is stricter than a prima facie case but does not require proof beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence must show strong complicity, and the power should be exercised sparingly to ensure fairness. The Court restored the Trial Court's summoning order, underscoring that the High Court erred in conducting a mini-trial at this stage. The judgment reaffirmed that the provision aims to prevent the guilty from escaping justice. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from an incident on 29th November 2017, w...

No Narco Test Without Consent: Supreme Court Cites Constitutional Rights

The Supreme Court ruled that involuntary narco-analysis tests violate Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution, affirming that such tests and information derived from them are inadmissible as sole evidence for conviction. While voluntary tests with safeguards are permissible, their results alone cannot lead to conviction. An accused has a right to voluntarily undergo the test during trial, but it's not an indefeasible right; the court must assess all circumstances, including free consent and safeguards. The Court emphasized that a bail application should not involve ordering such involuntary investigative techniques. Facts Of The Case: A First Information Report (FIR No. 545 of 2022) was registered on August 24, 2022, at P.S. Mahua, under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,...