Summary Security Force Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Civil Offences Beyond Simple Hurt And Theft: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Vague Allegations Cannot Dissolve a Sacred Marital Relationship: Karnataka High Court Upholds Dismissal of Divorce Petition Daughters Entitled to Coparcenary Rights in Ancestral Property under Hindu Succession Act, 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Divorce | False Allegations of Domestic Violence and Paternity Questions Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Hostile Witness Testimony Admissible if Corroborated by Independent Evidence: Punjab and Haryana High Court Fraud Must Be Specifically Pleaded and Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt to Invalidate Registered Documents: Andhra Pradesh High Court Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Rash Driving Conviction But Grants Probation to First-Time Offender Bus Driver Orissa High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Husband Convicted of Wife's Murder Merit Cannot Be Sacrificed for Procedural Technicalities in NEET UG Admissions: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Upholds Partition Decrees: Unregistered Partition Deed Inadmissible, Fails to Prove Prior Partition - Joint Hindu Family Property Presumed Undivided: Patna High Court Section 195(1)(b) CrPC | Judicial Integrity Cannot Be Undermined: Supreme Court Restores Evidence Tampering Case In a NDPS Case Readiness and Willingness, Not Time, Decide Equity in Sale Agreements: Supreme Court Denies Specific Performance Prolonged Detention Violates Fundamental Rights Under Article 21: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Money Laundering Case DV ACT | Economic Abuse Includes Alienation of Assets, Necessitating Protection Orders: Allahabad High Court Illegal Structures to Face Demolition: Bombay HC Directs Strict Action Against Unauthorized Constructions Justice Must Extend to the Last Person Behind Bars: Supreme Court Pushes for Full Implementation of BNSS Section 479 to Relieve Undertrial Prisoners Efficiency Over Central Oversight: Supreme Court Asserts Need for Localized SIT in Chennai Case Partition, Not Injunction, Is Remedy for Joint Property Disputes: P&H High Court Dismisses Plea Subsequent Purchaser Can Question Plaintiff’s Intent: MP High Court Clarifies Specific Relief Act Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court

Inconsistencies in Witness Testimonies Cannot Sustain Conviction: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal in 1993 Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Gujarat High Court has upheld the acquittal of Dipakbhai Nanubhai Patel in a murder case dating back to 1993, rejecting the State's appeal against the trial court’s decision. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Aniruddha P. Mayee and Divyesh A. Joshi, emphasized the inconsistencies in witness testimonies and the lack of credible medical evidence, reinforcing the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned unless there is substantial and compelling evidence to do so.

The case revolved around the alleged murder of Bhikhabhai, who was attacked with a hockey stick on the night of April 3, 1993, while returning from a condolence meeting. The prosecution claimed that the accused, Dipakbhai Nanubhai Patel, was the perpetrator. Following the attack, Bhikhabhai was hospitalized and eventually succumbed to his injuries on April 16, 1993. Despite witness statements and the recovery of the alleged weapon, the trial court acquitted Dipakbhai due to insufficient evidence, leading the State to file an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The court highlighted significant discrepancies in the witness statements. The complainant, Naginbhai Govindbhai, who was also the deceased’s nephew, initially claimed to have witnessed the attack but admitted during cross-examination that he had not disclosed this information earlier. The court noted, "The complainant’s statements before the trial court were marked by contradictions and improvements over his initial complaint, diminishing their reliability."

The court examined the medical evidence and the purported dying declaration of the deceased. Justice Mayee observed, "The statement of the deceased recorded by the investigating officer was not substantiated with proof that the deceased was in a conscious state at the time of giving the statement. Furthermore, the autopsy report indicated the cause of death as a brain infection, which could also result from a fall." The court concurred with the trial court’s assessment that the dying declaration lacked the necessary evidentiary weight.

The prosecution’s case also relied on the recovery of the hockey stick, allegedly used in the crime. However, the court found this evidence unconvincing, noting that the recovered stick did not have any blood stains or other corroborative material linking it to the crime.

The judgment reiterated the principle that in criminal appeals against acquittal, the presumption of innocence is reinforced, and the appellate court should be cautious in reversing such decisions unless there is clear evidence of a miscarriage of justice. "The golden thread in criminal jurisprudence is that if two views are possible, the one favoring the accused should be adopted," the bench stated, referencing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Allahrakha K. Mansuri vs. State of Gujarat.

Justice Mayee remarked, "The contradictions in the complainant’s testimony and the unsubstantiated medical evidence fail to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt."

Conclusion: The Gujarat High Court’s decision to uphold the acquittal underscores the judiciary’s commitment to the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty.' The judgment highlights the importance of consistent and corroborated evidence in securing a conviction. This ruling serves as a critical reminder of the stringent standards required for overturning an acquittal and is expected to influence future judicial assessments in similar cases.

 

Date of Decision: 27 May 2024

State of Gujarat vs. Dipakbhai Nanubhai Patel

Similar News