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

Delay Not Fatal and Alibi Insufficient – Conviction Upheld in Murder Case: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered on October 10, 2023, the Supreme Court of India upheld the conviction and sentences of the accused in a high-profile criminal appeal. The bench, presided over by Justice Sanjay Karol, addressed various crucial aspects of the case and set important legal precedents.

The central issue in this case was the appeal against the High Court's judgment that confirmed the conviction and sentences of the accused individuals under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Explosive Substance Act, 1908. The appellants had raised multiple grounds for their appeal.

One of the key aspects addressed by the Supreme Court was the delay in registering the First Information Report (FIR). The Court emphasized that "delay in filing the FIR cannot be said to be fatal to the case of the prosecution," highlighting that the timing of filing the FIR should be assessed based on the specific circumstances of each case.

Regarding the plea of alibi raised by the accused, the Supreme Court reiterated the legal principles governing such defenses. It stressed that "for the plea of alibi to be established, something other than a mere ocular statement ought to have been present," emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence to substantiate alibi claims.

The Court also examined allegations of contradictions in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses. After careful analysis, it found that the testimonies were coherent on essential aspects of the case, and there was no substantial contradiction that would undermine the credibility of the prosecution's case.

In response to claims about the deceased's criminal record, the Court noted that such claims were unsubstantiated on the record and could not be used as a defense against the charges. The Court emphasized that a history of criminal involvement could not automatically grant the benefit of doubt to the accused.

Supreme Court upheld the conviction and sentences, stating that they were neither excessive nor disproportionate to the crimes for which the appellants were convicted. The Court also canceled the bail granted earlier and directed the appellants to surrender immediately.

This judgment sets important legal precedents in criminal appeals, particularly regarding the assessment of delay in FIR registration and the requirements for establishing an alibi defense. It reinforces the principle that a criminal history of the deceased cannot be used as a blanket defense in cases involving serious charges.

Date of Decision: 10 October 2023

KAMAL PRASAD & ORS.  vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Latest Legal News