Appellate Court Can Allow Additional Evidence To Ensure Fair Adjudication Even If Not Produced In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts Under Section 106 BNSS Upon Suspicion Of 'Proceeds Of Crime': Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Penalty For Monthly MGQ Shortfall If Annual Target Met': Supreme Court Upholds Quashing Of Excise Department Demands For Liquor Licensees 'Murder Went Unavenged, But Courts Cannot Convict On Mere Assumptions': Supreme Court Acquits Accused In 1988 Murder Case, Quashes High Court's Remit Order 'NCSC Cannot Pass Mandatory Adjudicatory Orders Directing Payment Of Arrears': Supreme Court Clarifies Commission's Powers Under Article 338 "'Cannot Present Fait Accompli': Supreme Court Upholds Denial Of NOC To Airman For Skipping Prior Permission To Apply For Civil Post" Supreme Court Upholds 2017 Notification For Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearances, Quashes 2021 Office Memorandum As Impermissible Executive Overreach Workman Fails To Prove 240 Days Continuous Work; Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Denial Of Reinstatement For "Abandonment Of Service" Party Cannot Take Contradictory Stands In Same Case, Admissions In Pleadings Bind Them Under Order XII Rule 6 CPC: Telangana High Court Delayed Recovery Of Weapon From Open Space Casts Serious Doubt On Prosecution Story: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Convicts Procedural Irregularities By Public Servants Serve As Circumstantial Evidence Of Conspiracy In Corruption Cases: Kerala High Court Blaming Previous Counsel For Omission Does Not Satisfy 'Due Diligence' Test To Amend Plaint After Trial Commences: Punjab & Haryana High Court Muslim Man's Second Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Void Despite Personal Law Permitting Bigamy: Karnataka High Court Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court Title And Ownership Irrelevant In Suit Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act; Plaint Liable To Be Rejected If Filed Beyond Six Months: Delhi High Court Receipt Of Pension By Widow Can Be Considered To Determine 'Just Compensation' But Not To Deprive Claimants Of Award: Calcutta High Court FSL Report Lacking Scientific Criteria And Data Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Allahabad High Court Issues Directives For Testing Viscera Standard Of Proof In Railway Accident Claims Is Preponderance Of Probabilities, Not Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Gujarat High Court No Second Statutory Appeal Lies Against Conviction By Appellate Court Reversing Acquittal; Revision Is Sole Remedy: Supreme Court Wives' Property Is Their Own, Not Husband's: Supreme Court REJECTS High Court's Succession Formula; Restores Clarity For Christian Inheritance

Lack of Direct Evidence of Cruelty Leads to Reasonable Doubt: High Court Acquits in Abetment to Suicide Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Calcutta has acquitted Bimal Paul in a long-standing abetment to suicide and cruelty case, citing substantial inconsistencies and lack of direct evidence. The verdict, delivered by Hon’ble Justice Subhendu Samanta, has overturned the earlier conviction by the Sessions Court.

Justice Samanta’s observation highlighted a crucial point in the acquittal: “There is no direct evidence in this case regarding the fact that Padma was inflicted torture whether physically and mentally by the present appellant.” This statement underscores the court’s rationale behind questioning the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the prosecution.

The case, which originated from a complaint filed by Gita Pal, accused Bimal Paul of torturing her daughter Padma, leading to her suicide. However, the High Court noted significant discrepancies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the absence of clear proof of cruelty as defined under Section 498A of the IPC.

Justice Samanta also critically examined the applicability of Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act in this case. He remarked, “The presumption u/s 113A of Evidence Act is a rebuttable presumption,” indicating that the mere occurrence of suicide within seven years of marriage does not automatically imply abetment by the husband.

The judgment extensively deliberated on the circumstances surrounding the marriage and subsequent events, including the mental state of the victim following the loss of her child. The court observed that these factors, coupled with the family’s socio-economic condition, did not conclusively point towards cruelty or abetment.

Date of Decision: 15 January  2024

Sri Bimal Paul VS State of West Bengal   

 

Latest Legal News