MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Acquittal in Murder Case: Circumstantial Evidence Must Unerringly Point Towards Guilt: Gauhati High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Gauhati High Court acquitted Mohan Kumar, previously convicted for the murder of Padma Kumari and inflicting grievous injury on Binod Kumar. The bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Malasri Nandi overturned the earlier verdict, emphasizing the importance of conclusive circumstantial evidence in criminal cases.

The court observed, “To convict an accused on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt each of incriminating circumstances on which it proposes to rely.” This observation came as the linchpin in Kumar’s acquittal, spotlighting the gaps in the prosecution’s case based on circumstantial evidence.

Mohan Kumar was initially convicted under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Sessions Judge, Baksa. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with additional fines. However, his appeal to the Gauhati High Court brought forth significant inconsistencies and gaps in the prosecution’s narrative.

The judgment highlighted the lack of eye-witness testimony and the discrepancies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. Most notably, the court pointed out the investigative lapses, such as the absence of a serological examination of the alleged murder weapon and the non-inclusion of Kumar’s signature on the seizure list.

In their pivotal judgment, the bench stated, “The circumstances relied upon must be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards accused’s guilt and must form a chain so far complete that there is no escape from conclusion that within all human probability it is accused and no one else who had committed the crime.” 

Date of Judgment: 21st November 2023

MOHAN KUMAR VS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.     

Latest Legal News