Accused Loses Right To Default Bail By Acquiescence If Extension Orders Are Challenged Only After Chargesheet Filing: Supreme Court AP High Court Orders Release Of Vehicle Seized For Mineral Transport Violations Upon Payment Of Penalty, Says Rules Don't Mandate Indefinite Detention Short Time Gap Between 'Last Seen' And Death Clinches Murder Conviction Against Fired Driver: Allahabad High Court Court Must Restore Possession To Dispossessed Party If Ex-Parte Decree Is Set Aside Even If Property Descriptions Differ: Andhra Pradesh High Court Management Cannot Deny Compassionate Appointment Citing Delay If It Failed To Maintain Service Records: Calcutta High Court Long Possession Alone Does Not Establish Tenancy; Burden Of Proof Lies On Person Claiming Status Of Tenant: Bombay High Court Consent Of Minor Immaterial: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction But Acquits Man Of Kidnapping Charges Notional Income Of Minor In Motor Accident Claims Must Be Based On Minimum Wages Of Skilled Workmen: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹56.8 Lakhs Revenue Records Serve Only Fiscal Purpose, Cannot Be Treated As Proof Of Title To Property: Supreme Court Executing Court Cannot Grant 'Deemed Extension' Of Time For Deposit In Specific Performance Decree: Supreme Court Specific Performance Decree Becomes Inexecutable If Balance Sale Consideration Not Deposited Within Stipulated Time: Supreme Court Supreme Court Protects MSMEs From Closure Over Missing Environmental Clearance If Pollution Boards Were Unaware Of Requirement Industrial Units Operating With Valid PCB Consents Can't Be Closed Merely For Technical Want Of Prior Environmental Clearance: Supreme Court Punishment On Charge Not Framed In Show Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Supreme Court Reduces Doctor's Penalty To Censure Plea Of Acquiescence Cannot Defeat Lawful Title Claim When Encroachment Is Established: Madras High Court Board Of Revenue Can't Quash Unchallenged Orders While Exercising Revisional Jurisdiction: Orissa High Court Penetration To Any Extent Sufficient For Offence Under POCSO Act; Intact Hymen No Bar For Conviction: Meghalaya High Court Expeditious Conclusion Of Summary Force Court Trial Not Arbitrary If Procedure Followed; ITBPF Act Self-Contained: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Doesn't Bar Appeal Filed Prior To Withdrawal Of Earlier Defective Appeal Against Same Order: Madhya Pradesh High Court Appointment Of Receiver Is An 'Extreme Remedy', Cannot Be Ordered Lightly Especially After Decades Of Inaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court

ACQUITTAL IN RAPE CASE - LACK OF CONVINCING EVIDENCE AND THE NON-EXAMINATION OF A KEY WITNESS – SUPREME COURT

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgement, the Supreme Court of India acquitted the appellant, Davinder Singh, in a highly anticipated judgment delivered by Justice M. M. Sundresh. The court, while setting aside the appellant's convictions under Sections 376, 452, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), emphasized the lack of convincing evidence and the non-examination of a key witness. The judgment, rendered on June 22, 2023, carries significant implications for criminal cases involving similar circumstances.

Justice Sundresh, in his ruling, highlighted the importance of scrutinizing the evidence and ensuring the presence of material witnesses. Referring to the non-examination of a crucial eyewitness, the court noted that the prosecution's case appeared doubtful. The judgment cited previous court decisions, emphasizing the need to draw adverse inferences against the prosecution when material witnesses are withheld. The court further pointed out that the non-examination of the witness, who could have shed light on the genesis of the incident, weakened the prosecution's case.

The appellant's counsel had raised various submissions challenging the prosecution's version of events. They argued that there was no recovery of the alleged weapon, no external injuries were found on the prosecutrix, and there was an inordinate delay in filing the complaint. The counsel further highlighted the absence of a motive and questioned the credibility of the complainant. The court acknowledged these concerns, stating that the evidence presented did not conform to the degree of probability required for conviction.

The judgment also criticized the High Court's analysis, highlighting its factual errors and cursory examination of the evidence. The court observed that the High Court had incorrectly attributed the offense under Section 376 IPC to the uncle's residence of the prosecutrix, contrary to her own testimony. Additionally, the court noted that the subsequent compromise between the parties, which occurred after the complainant's death, was not a significant factor to consider in the present appeal.

With the acquittal of the appellant, the Supreme Court's decision carries far-reaching implications. The ruling emphasizes the importance of thoroughly evaluating the evidence, examining material witnesses, and ensuring the credibility of testimonies. It serves as a reminder that convictions must be based on a high degree of probability and a conscientious analysis of the available facts.

Supreme Court has set aside the convictions against the appellant, acquitting him of all charges. The court's ruling underscores the need for robust evidence and the examination of material witnesses in criminal proceedings, serving as a landmark decision in the Indian legal landscape.

Date of Decision: June 22, 2023

Davinder Singh vs State of Punjab 

Latest Legal News