Limitation For Executing Partition Decree Not Suspended Till Engrossment; Right To Seek Engrossment Subsists During 12-Year Execution Period: Allahabad HC Unilateral Revocation Of Registered Gift Deed Through Sub-Registrar Is Void, Donor Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mediation Cannot Be Forced Upon Unwilling Party In Civil Suits; Consent Of Both Sides Essential: Bombay High Court Unmarried Daughter Not Entitled To Freedom Fighter Pension If Gainfully Employed At Time Of Father's Death: Calcutta High Court Section 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Denied For Lack Of Formal Divorce From First Marriage: Delhi High Court ONGC Cannot Demand Security From Award Holder After Giving ‘No Objection’ To Withdrawal Of Deposited Amount: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sedative Drugs Like Tramadol Impact Mental Fitness Of Declarant; Bombay High Court Acquits Man Relying On Doubtful Dying Declarations Postal Tracking Report Showing 'Refusal' Not Conclusive Proof Of Service If Denied On Oath: Delhi High Court Encroachments Near Military Installations Pose National Security Threat; Remove Illegal Constructions Within Three Months: Rajasthan High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs State To Decide On Legality Of Charging Fees For Downloading FIRs From 'SAANJH' Portal Wife’s Educational Qualifications No Bar To Seeking Maintenance If Actual Employment Is Not Proven: Orissa High Court Mere Telephonic Contact Without Substance Of Conversation Cannot Establish Criminal Conspiracy: Madhya Pradesh High Court Serious Allegations Like HIV/AIDS Imputations Require Corroboration, Cannot Rest Solely On Unsubstantiated Testimony: Karnataka High Court Family Court Cannot Refuse Mutual Consent Divorce Merely Because Parties Are Living Separately 'Without Valid Reason': Kerala High Court Collective Attempts By Advocates To Overbear Presiding Officer Not Protected Professional Conduct: Madras High Court Dismisses Quash Petitions No Legal Evidence Required To Forward A Person To Trial? Rajasthan HC Slams Police For Implicating Accused In NDPS Case Solely On Co-Accused's Statement Accused Must Be Physically Present In Court To Furnish Bonds Under Section 91 BNSS: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Identification for the first time in Court without holding ‘Test Identification Parade’ creates serious doubt: Supreme Court Acquits In Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgement dated April 30, 2024, the Supreme Court of India has acquitted Suresh @ Unni @ Vadi Suresh of all charges in a 2006 criminal incident citing doubts over witness identification procedures and evidence credibility. The bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta overturned previous convictions by the High Court and trial court, which had sustained multiple charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and other statutes against the appellant.

The appeal centered on the legal validity of witness identification and the subsequent handling of evidence in the case against Suresh, who had been accused of participating in a violent attack that led to one death and severe injuries to another in Kerala.

On March 6, 2006, a group allegedly attacked a video shop, resulting in the death of one person and injuries to another, identified as Ajeesh (PW-2). The group was accused of forming an unlawful assembly with deadly weapons and bombs. Suresh was later arrested in 2008, and despite multiple charges, the reliability of witness testimonies and evidence recovery was contested.

Witness Testimony and Identification: The Supreme Court highlighted significant delays in witness testimonies and pointed out that the appellant, Suresh, was identified in court for the first time years after the incident without a prior test identification parade, casting doubt on the identification's authenticity.

Evidence Recovery: The credibility of the recovery of an iron rod, purportedly used in the crime, was questioned. The court noted implausibility in the preservation of blood stains over an extended period which was subject to environmental exposure, including two monsoon seasons.

Motive and Misidentification: The court noted inconsistencies in the appellant's description and the absence of a direct motive linked to him, suggesting the possibility of mistaken identity.

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the earlier judgements. The court acquitted Suresh of all charges, directing his immediate release unless required in another case. This decision underscores the necessity of rigorous standards in criminal identification and evidence handling.

Date of Decision: April 30, 2024

Suresh @ Unni @ Vadi Suresh Versus The State of Kerala

 

Latest Legal News