Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

"Flawed Investigation and Lack of Evidence" Lead to Acquittal of Accused in Shihab Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the court of Judges P.B. SURESH KUMAR and C.S. SUDHA on 11th August 2023 acquitted accused 1 to 7 in the murder case of Shihab, citing "flawed investigation and lack of evidence."

The accused were charged with the murder of Shihab, allegedly committed using specific vehicles. The prosecution had built its case on the testimony of two witnesses and the seizure of the vehicles. However, the court found that there was "no satisfactory evidence connecting MO11 and MO13 to the crime or the accused to the vehicles" (Para 27).

The judgment highlighted serious lapses in the investigation, including inconsistencies in the police diary and a delay in questioning key witnesses. The court observed, "The facts aforesaid revealed from the police diary, according to us, would show either that this is a case where the investigating officer has arrayed the accused in the case as the assailants of Shihab for extraneous reasons or solely for the reason that they are active members of the organization, RSS without conducting proper investigation" (Para 30).

The court's decision to acquit the accused was not based on a finding of innocence but rather on the flawed investigation. The judgment expressed concern over the impact of such flawed investigations on the credibility of the justice system, stating, "We are conscious of the fact that acquittal of the accused in a case of this nature would seriously affect the credibility of the justice delivery system, but we are constrained to do so, as we have real doubt as to whether it is accused 1 to 7 who have committed the crime, though we do not have any doubt to the fact that the crime has been committed by a group of persons in the manner alleged" (Para 34).

The court's decision has brought attention to the importance of proper investigation and the potential consequences of faulty investigation on both the accused and the justice system as a whole. The ruling emphasizes the need for deeper investigation and careful consideration of evidence to ensure that justice is served.

Date of Decision: 11.08.2023

NAVEEN vs STATE OF KERALA

Similar News