Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: 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 2:49 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