"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

In the Absence of Motive and Conclusive Evidence, ‘Last Seen’ Theory Fails to Establish Guilt: Supreme Court Acquits in Circumstantial Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India acquitted Arun Shankar in a murder case, underscoring the insufficiency of circumstantial evidence to conclusively prove guilt.

The apex court emphasized the principles for cases based on circumstantial evidence, drawing from the landmark Sharad Birdhichand Sarda judgment. The Court highlighted that for conviction, the circumstances must be fully established and consistent solely with the accused’s guilt, forming a complete chain pointing towards no conclusion other than guilt.

Arun Shankar was convicted for the murder of Sushildhar Dubey based on circumstantial evidence including the ‘last seen’ theory, recovery of the murder weapon, and medical evidence. The central issue revolved around the reliability and conclusiveness of this evidence, particularly in the absence of a clear motive.

 

Weak ‘Last Seen’ Theory: Regular interactions and absence of a motive or altercation between Shankar and Dubey weakened the last seen theory.

Unproved Weapon Recovery: Testimonies of key witnesses failed to conclusively establish the recovery of the murder weapon at Shankar’s instance.

Alternative Theory of Accidental Death: The possibility of Dubey’s accidental death was supported by the presence of glass pieces at the crime scene and medical opinions indicating such injuries could be caused by glass.

The Supreme Court found the circumstances did not conclusively point to Shankar’s guilt, allowing for reasonable doubt. Consequently, Shankar was acquitted of the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, and his bail bonds were cancelled

Date of Decision: April 10, 2024

Arun Shankar vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Similar News