Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court

"Allahabad High Court Acquits Accused in Triple Murder Case Citing 'Unreliable and Contradictory Testimonies'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment the Allahabad High Court has acquitted the accused in a notable triple murder case, underscoring the inconsistencies and unreliability in the prosecution's narrative. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Siddhartha Varma and Anish Kumar Gupta, overturned the previous conviction, emphasizing that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

The case, registered under Criminal Appeal No. 1640 and 1647 of 2012, involved the brutal killing of three individuals on July 26, 2007. Initially, the FIR lodged by Shyam Singh (PW-1) led to the charge sheet against five individuals, including the appellants, under various sections of the IPC, including Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, and 504.

During the trial, the testimonies of key prosecution witnesses, particularly the eye-witnesses, were marred by inconsistencies. The court noted significant contradictions in their statements regarding crucial details of the incident. "The manner in which the prosecution witnesses had changed their stand about the fact as to how they had witnessed the incident makes the entire prosecution story unreliable," the bench observed in its judgment.

Further doubts were raised regarding the investigative process. The Investigating Officer, acknowledged in court, failed to record statements from several individuals present at the crime scene and inconsistencies in the recovery of evidence, casting a shadow over the evidence's reliability.

A critical turn in the case was the testimony of a defense witness, purportedly the driver of the tractor involved in the incident, who categorically denied the presence of the primary eyewitnesses in the tractor trolley. This testimony directly contradicted the prosecution's claims and was pivotal in the court's decision.

In their concluding remarks, the judges stated, "Even though it is correct that minor discrepancies should be ignored, we find that the discrepancies are of such a nature which cannot be ignored." This observation played a crucial role in the acquittal of the appellants.

The case also brought to light the status of two appellants, Pravesh and Vipin, who were declared juveniles post-conviction and consequently released. The third appellant, Manoj, has been ordered to be released forthwith, unless required in connection with another case.

This judgment underscores the importance of reliable and consistent testimonies in criminal proceedings and highlights the judiciary's role in ensuring justice is served based on concrete evidence and unwavering facts.

Date of Decision: 04-03-2024

PRAVESH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Latest Legal News