Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

Acquittal in Murder Case: Identification of the Appellant by PW-6 in the Court is Not Free from Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India overturned the conviction of Mohd. Rijwan, who was earlier sentenced to life imprisonment under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by both the Sessions Court and the High Court.

The bench, comprised of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, delivered the verdict today, stating that the prosecution had failed to prove its case "beyond a reasonable doubt." The Court highlighted several gaps in the prosecution's case, primarily based on circumstantial evidence.

Commenting on the crucial aspect of witness identification, Justice Abhay S. Oka observed, "the identification of the appellant by PW-6 in the court is not free from reasonable doubt." The Court noted that instead of holding a test identification parade, the key witness, PW-6, was shown the appellant in the office of the Superintendent of Police, which makes his courtroom identification doubtful.

The prosecution's case was primarily anchored on two points: that the deceased and the appellant were last seen together and that the deceased's body was recovered at the appellant's instance. The Court remarked that "the important circumstance of the last seen together has not been established," thereby dismantling the foundational elements of the prosecution's argument.

Another key gap in the prosecution’s case was its failure to examine Hari Chand Sharma, an important witness who could have supported the 'last seen together' theory. "The prosecution has offered no explanation for the failure to examine this important witness," Justice Oka noted.

The Court concluded that "the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt," and therefore acquitted Mohd. Rijwan. His bail bonds have been subsequently canceled.

Legal experts view this judgement as a significant affirmation of the need for meticulous scrutiny in cases based on circumstantial evidence.

The judgement does not specify any referred cases or representing advocates.

Date of Decision: October 13, 2023.

Mohd. Rijwan vs State of Haryana               

Latest Legal News