Benefit Of Acquittal Can Be Extended To Non-Appealing Co-Accused If Prosecution Case Is Found To Be Fundamentally Unreliable: Madras High Court Hindu Marriage Act | Petition For Restitution Of Conjugal Rights Serves As A Valid Defence Against Allegations Of Desertion: Kerala High Court Employee Has No Vested Right To Seek Or Retain Additional Charge; Writ Petition Not Maintainable To Challenge Its Withdrawal: Madhya Pradesh High Court Insurance Act | Insurer Cannot Waive Statutory Deadline For Premium Payment Under Bank Guarantee; No Estoppel Against Statute: NCDRC Absence Of Crime Number In Inquest Report & Discrepancy In Sec 157 CrPC Special Report Renders FIR Doubtful: Allahabad High Court MTP Act  | Termination Of Pregnancy Beyond 24 Weeks Permissible If It Involves Risk To Life Or Grave Injury To Mental Health Of The Victim: Gujarat High Court Section 174A IPC | FIR Cannot Be Quashed If Process Server Reports Indicate Failure To Serve At Ordinary Residence: Delhi High Court Issues Guidelines Insolvency Petition | Transferees Of Debtor Cannot Substitute Debtor To Rebut Allegation Of Intent To Defeat Creditors Under Section 6(b) Provincial Insolvency Act: High Court Medical Negligence | Doctor Cannot Be Held Liable For Choosing One Reasonable Course Of Treatment Over Another: Bombay High Court Cruelty | Non-Registration Of FIR Cannot Be Ground To Discredit Testimony Of Wife Seeking Divorce: Jharkhand High Court No Deception At Inception: Calcutta High Court Refuses To Revive Cheating Charges Against Borrower After One-Time Settlement Consumer Protection Act | Doctrine Of 'Caveat Emptor' Subservient To 'Caveat Venditor'; Auctioneer Liable For Sale Of Encumbered Vehicle: State Commission Section 127 CrPC | Past Compromise Not An Eternal Estoppel To Bar Wife From Seeking Enhancement In Maintenance: Orissa High Court States Can Prescribe Higher Qualifications Than UGC Norms, Additional Tests Promote Meritocracy: Punjab & Haryana High Court Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Cancel Registered Sale Deed Or Adjudicate Title Disputes: Telangana High Court Principal Employer Cannot Abdicate Statutory Liability For Overtime Wages Of Contract Labour Despite Contractual Indemnity Clauses: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Preliminary Inquiry Not Mandatory For Invoking SC/ST Act Provisions If Allegations Disclose Cognizable Offence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked For Re-valuation Of Structures Once Compensation Dispute Is Adjudicated Under Section 64 RFCTLARR Act: Telangana High Court Revenue Village Naming | Government Must Ensure Names Do Not Reflect Any Person, Caste, Or Religion Under Policy Guidelines: Rajasthan High Court Section 138 NI Act | Complainant Must Prove Proprietorship Of Firm To Establish Status As 'Payee' Or 'Holder In Due Course': Himachal Pradesh High Court

Extra-Judicial Confessions, While Admissible, Are Inherently Weak Pieces Of Evidence: SC

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


 

In the judgment, Justice Abhay S. Oka noted, "Extra-judicial confessions, while admissible, are inherently weak pieces of evidence. The reliability of such confessions hinges on factors such as voluntariness, truthfulness, and the relationship between the confessor and the recipient of the confession." The Court expressed doubt about the appellant's confession, which was made to a complete stranger more than two months after the incident. The justices questioned the credibility of such a confession under these circumstances.

Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment, acquitting an appellant who had been convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The judgment, authored by Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol, highlighted the importance of legal evidence and the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

The case centered around the appellant's alleged involvement in the murder of his wife, for which he had been sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution's case rested primarily on an extra-judicial confession, the recovery of the victim's body, and an alleged weapon. However, the Court found serious discrepancies in the evidence presented.

Furthermore, the Court examined the recovery of the victim's body and the alleged weapon, pointing to inconsistencies in the witnesses' testimonies and the accessibility of the burial site to multiple individuals. The Court also highlighted the lack of corroboration for the "last seen together" theory, a critical aspect of the prosecution's case.

"The principle of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is fundamental to our legal system," Justice Sanjay Karol remarked. "In this case, we find serious doubts about the authenticity of the prosecution's evidence. The prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the lower court judgments, acquitting the appellant of all charges. The Court canceled the appellant's bail bonds as the appellant was already on bail.

Date of Decision: August 18, 2023

Moorthy   vs State of Tamil Nadu         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Legal News