Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

High Court Acquits Husband in Dowry Death Case: Inconsistencies in Witness Testimonies and Delay in FIR as Key Factors

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment yesterday, the Gauhati High Court overturned the conviction of Sibu Sarkar, previously sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the alleged murder of his wife. The Bench, comprising Honourable Mr. Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Honourable Mr. Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita, delivered a judgment that highlighted significant inconsistencies in witness testimonies and an unexplained delay in the filing of the FIR.

The High Court observed, “The delayed lodging of the FIR, in itself, raises a doubt regarding the veracity of the allegations leveled against the present appellant in the FIR.” This observation was central to their decision, emphasizing the importance of prompt and consistent reporting in legal proceedings, especially in criminal cases.

The judgment meticulously dissected the testimonies, particularly scrutinizing the reliability of a key child witness, PW-6, the daughter of the appellant and the deceased. The court noted material contradictions in her statements at different investigation stages, raising concerns about the possibility of her being influenced or tutored.

Another pivotal aspect of the case was the dying declaration of the victim, which suggested the fire was accidental. The court found that this crucial piece of evidence had not been given due weight by the Trial Court. The appellant’s legal representative, Mr. S.S.S. Rahman, argued effectively on these points, leading to a significant shift in the case’s direction.

The prosecution, represented by Ms. B. Bhuyan, Additional Public Prosecutor, and Ms. P. Bora, Advocate, argued for upholding the conviction, citing the initial Trial Court’s findings. However, the High Court’s judgment prioritized the inconsistencies and procedural delays that cast doubt on the conviction’s foundation.

This acquittal has sparked discussions among legal circles about the critical role of accurate and prompt FIR lodgment and the treatment of child witness testimonies in criminal trials. The judgment also serves as a reminder of the judicial system’s commitment to ensuring that justice is served based on thorough scrutiny of all available evidence.          

Date of Decision: November 18, 2023

SIBU SARKAR VS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.

Similar News