"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

Discovery of Fact Must Distinctly Relate to the Accused’s Information To Admissible U/ S 27 Evidence Act: Supreme Court in Murder Case Acquittal

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court of India, led by Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, acquitted the appellants in the criminal appeal nos. 3869 of 2023 and 2740 of 2023, overturning their earlier conviction in a murder case.

The apex court’s decision hinged on the interpretation and application of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, focusing on whether the recovered evidence distinctly related to the information provided by the accused.

The case involved the conviction of the appellants for murder based on circumstantial evidence and memorandum statements under Section 27, which led to the discovery of a body. The judgment scrutinized the link between these statements and the actual discovery of the body.

Witness Testimony Inconsistencies: The Court highlighted discrepancies in the testimonies regarding the body’s discovery, suggesting knowledge of the murder prior to the statements recorded under Section 27.

Application of Section 27 of the Evidence Act: The judgment underscored the inadequacy of evidence connecting the discovery of the body directly to the appellants’ information, casting doubt on the prosecution’s reliance on Section 27.

Necessity for a Complete Chain of Circumstances: Emphasizing the need for an unbroken chain of circumstances, the Court found the prosecution failed to establish a sequence leading conclusively to the appellants’ guilt.

Decision: The Supreme Court reversed the decisions of the High Court and Trial Court, acquitting the appellants. The Court stressed the critical nature of linking the discovery of a fact directly and distinctly to the information provided by the accused in cases built on circumstantial evidence.

Date of Decision: April 10, 2024.

Ravishankar Tandon vs. State of Chhattisgarh,

 

Similar News