Owner Can Avoid Confiscation Under NDPS by Proving Lack of Knowledge or Connivance in Illicit Use of Vehicle: Supreme Court Court is Expert of Experts: High Court Upholds Right to Rebuttal Evidence in Will Dispute Exceptional Circumstances Warrant Use of Inherent Powers to Reduce Sentences in Non-Compoundable Offenses: Supreme Court Execution of Eviction Decree Limited to Suit Premises; Additional Claims Not Permissible: Bombay High Court Only Apprentices Under the 1961 Act Are Excluded from Gratuity – Calcutta High Court Demand for Penalty and Interest Without Following Natural Justice Violates Section 11A of the Central Excise Act: P&H High Court Rajasthan High Court Acquits Bank Manager, Citing "Processing Fee, Not Bribe" in Corruption Case Compensatory Nature of Section 138 NI Act Permits Compounding Even at Revisional Stage: Madras High Court Kerala High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 99 Crore: Faults Adjudicating Authority for Contradictory Findings Section 138 NI Act | Compounding Permitted Even at Revisional Stage with Reduced Fee in Special Circumstances: HP High Court No Renewal, Only Re-Tendering’ – Upholds Railway Board’s MPS License Policy: Delhi High Court Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes Second FIR Against Former Minister in Corruption Case Nature of Suit Must Be Determined on Evidence, Not Technical Grounds: Delhi High Court on Rejection of Plaint Economic Offences Must Be Scrutinized to Protect Public Interest:  Allahabad High Court Dismisses Plea to Quash FIR Against Cloud Investment Scheme Company Golden Hour Care Is a Matter of Right, Not Privilege: Supreme Court on Road Accident Victim Treatment Limitation Law | When Once the Time Has Begun to Run, Nothing Stops It: Supreme Court Section 14 of Limitation Act Shields Bona Fide Claimants: SC Validates Arbitration Amid Procedural Delay Time Lost Cannot Be Restored, But Justice Can: Supreme Court Orders Immediate Release of Convict Declared Juvenile Bailable Warrants in Domestic Violence Cases Only in Exceptional Circumstances - Domestic Violence Act Cases Are Primarily Remedial, Not Punitive: Supreme Court

Non-Examination of Investigating Officer is Fatal to Prosecution Case: Jharkhand High Court Acquits Man in Wife's Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal decision, the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi has acquitted Jumed Khan, who was previously convicted for the murder of his wife under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. This ruling underscores the crucial role of the Investigating Officer’s testimony in cases hinging on circumstantial evidence, with the court emphasizing that the non-examination of the primary Investigating Officer was a fatal flaw in the prosecution’s case.

The appeal challenged Jumed Khan’s conviction for the murder of his wife and subsequent destruction of evidence. The prosecution’s case rested on circumstantial evidence, including motive linked to familial strife and the discovery of the body. However, the primary issue revolved around the absence of direct evidence connecting Khan to the crime and the non-examination of the Investigating Officer.

The High Court scrutinized the circumstantial evidence in detail. It noted that while certain aspects like motive and the discovery of the body were established, they failed to directly implicate the appellant in the absence of conclusive evidence.

Importance of Investigating Officer’s Testimony: The judgment pointed out the crucial role of the Investigating Officer in cases based on circumstantial evidence. The failure to examine the primary Investigating Officer was seen as a significant oversight, detrimental to the prosecution’s case.

Principles of Circumstantial Evidence: Drawing upon the Sharad Birdhichand Sarda judgment, the court emphasized the necessity for a complete and unbroken chain of evidence pointing conclusively to the guilt of the accused, a criterion not met in this case.

Standard of Proof in Criminal Cases: The court reiterated the foundational principle of criminal jurisprudence that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace the requirement for proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Decision:  The High Court, observing the gaps in the chain of circumstantial evidence and the critical non-examination of the Investigating Officer, overturned the conviction and sentence, leading to Khan’s acquittal.

Date of Decision: 19th March 2024.

Jumed Khan vs. The State of Jharkhand,

Similar News