Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son IT Act | Ambiguity in statutory notices undermines the principles of natural justice: Delhi High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeals Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction Under NDPS Act: Procedural Lapses Insufficient to Overturn Case Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Accused, Points to Possible Suicide Pact in "Tragic Love Affair" Tampering With Historical Documents To Support A Caste Claim Strikes At The Root Of Public Trust And Cannot Be Tolerated: Bombay High Court Offense Impacts Society as a Whole: Madras High Court Denies Bail in Cyber Harassment Case Custody disputes must be resolved in appropriate forums, and courts cannot intervene beyond legal frameworks in the guise of habeas corpus jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Insubordination Is A Contagious Malady In Any Employment And More So In Public Service : Karnataka High Court imposes Rs. 10,000 fine on Tribunal staff for frivolous petition A Show Cause Notice Issued Without Jurisdiction Cannot Withstand Judicial Scrutiny: AP High Court Sets Aside Rs. 75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand Timely Action is Key: P&H HC Upholds Lawful Retirement at 58 for Class-III Employees Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Not Applicable to Civil Court Orders: Patna High Court Uttarakhand High Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown, Acknowledges Cruelty Due to Prolonged Separation Prosecution Must Prove Common Object For An Unlawful Assembly - Conviction Cannot Rest On Assumptions: Telangana High Court

Eyewitness Testimonies Are Neither Reliable Nor Credible If They Are At Variance With The Physical Facts Of The Case – Supreme Court Acquits In Murder Appeal

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court has acquitted Jagvir Singh, who had been previously convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The Apex Court’s bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta found critical inconsistencies in the eyewitness accounts which led to the acquittal.

Legal Context: The judgment arose from an appeal against the decision of the Allahabad High Court, which had affirmed the trial court’s conviction of Singh for the alleged murder of Sanju. The primary evidence against Singh was based on eyewitness testimony, which the Supreme Court scrutinized thoroughly.

Facts and Issues: The case involved the fatal shooting of Sanju, alleged by the prosecution to have been carried out by Singh and another accused, Omkar, from the roof of Omkar’s house. Eyewitnesses claimed they saw the accused firing at the victim. However, these accounts were challenged on the grounds of physical and logical improbabilities.

Eyewitness Credibility: Justice Mehta, in his judgment, pointed out that the so-called eyewitnesses, including Ram Prakash (PW-1), Sultan Singh (PW-2), and Ram Naresh (PW-5), provided testimony that conflicted with the physical layout and possibilities of the site where the murder took place.

Physical Impossibilities: The court noted discrepancies such as the distance between the locations of the accused and the victim at the time of the shooting, which made it improbable for the eyewitnesses to see the incident from their claimed positions.

Inconsistencies in Testimony: The testimonies of the witnesses were found to be at variance with each other and with the physical facts of the case. For instance, some witnesses claimed to have seen the shooting from positions where visibility of the event was impossible.

Unreliable Narratives: The Apex Court found that the narrative constructed by the prosecution was filled with inherent improbabilities that rendered the eyewitness testimonies unreliable.

Decision: The Supreme Court, citing the principles laid down in Selveraj v. State of Tamil Nadu, concluded that the eyewitness accounts were not credible and acquitted Singh. The Court underscored the importance of reliable evidence in criminal trials, especially when the liberty of the accused is at stake.

Date of Decision: May 7, 2024.

Jagvir Singh vs. State of U.P.

Similar News