Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

"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