Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

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

 

Similar News