MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

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