Mother Cannot Mask Paternity to Satisfy Ego: Bombay High Court Rejects Petition to List Woman as ‘Single Parent’ in Child’s Birth Certificate Transferee Pendente Lite Is Bound by the Decree—Cannot Obstruct Execution Proceedings: Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Revisional Court for Overreach Higher Placement in Seniority List Cannot Be Ignored: Supreme Court Upholds Direction to Consider Contractual Worker for Appointment on Par with Others Regularised CBI Investigation is Not to Be Ordered Routinely on Vague Allegations: Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court’s Order Directing CBI Probe in Extortion Case When Aggressors Trespass Armed into a Dwelling and Cause Fatal Injuries, Exception to Murder Does Not Arise: Supreme Court Affirms Conviction under Section 302 IPC Delayed Payment for 50 Years Warrants Reasonable Interest, But Excessive Rates Cannot Be Granted": Supreme Court Total Non-Compliance of Section 42 and 50 is Impermissible: Himachal Pradesh High Court Affirms Acquittal in 100 Grams Charas Case Can't Rule Out ASI's Role In False Rape Case Conspiracy: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses To Expunge Remarks Wikipedia Can't Claim Neutrality While Hosting Defamatory Edits: Delhi High Court Orders Takedown in ANI's Defamation Suit No Evidence of Termination—Industrial Tribunal’s Award Granting Full Back Wages Without Trial Set Aside: Calcutta High Court Delay of 1132 Days Can't Be Excused by Casual Excuses: Bombay High Court Dismisses Builder’s Plea, Upholds NCDRC Order in Consumer Dispute

Cr.P.C | High Court Upholds Acquittal of Accused in 1998 Murder - False Identity and Flawed Testimony

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court today acquitted all the accused in a two-decade-old murder case, stating that the prosecution had relied on "false identity and flawed testimony."

The case dated back to June 16, 1998, where Tek Chand and his brothers were attacked by multiple individuals, resulting in three deaths. Tek Chand filed the case against Ashok Yadav, Shobha Ram, Yogesh, Rakesh, and Rukamesh, accusing them of various offenses under the Indian Penal Code.

Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, in their judgment, noted, "For the aforesaid reasons, the benefit of doubt was given to the accused persons who were acquitted."

Key Points in the Judgment:

The court pointed out several lapses in the prosecution's case, most notably the failure to establish the true identity of the accused. The defense was able to show that three of the accused were in jail at the time of the incident, effectively providing an alibi. "This fact reflects that the Respondent witnesses have deposed falsely with regard to the accused persons," the judgment observed.

Another significant point in the ruling was the court's observation on the prosecution's reliance on oral testimony. "In the absence of any such evidence, the entire case of the prosecution rests on the oral testimony of PW-1 and PW-5," the court stated, making it clear that the prosecution failed to present substantial evidence to convict the accused.

Aggrieved by the acquittal, the State preferred leave to appeal against the judgment. However, the court noted that the case against the accused was not strong enough and hence upheld the acquittal.

The judgment has stirred conversations around the importance of diligent prosecution and has also raised questions about how cases of such gravity can rely solely on oral testimony without substantial evidence.

Date of Decision: August 22, 2023

 TEK CHAND vs  STATE OF U P & ORS.      

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Tek_Chand_Vs_NCT_22Aug23_DelHC.pdf"]

Similar News