Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court Acquits Appellant in Murder and Kidnapping Case – No Conclusive Evidence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court acquitted the appellant, Dinesh Kumar, who was convicted for offences under Sections 364 and 302 of the IPC (Indian Penal Code). The verdict, delivered by Hon’ble Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Hon’ble Justice Kuldeep Tiwari, sheds light on the sufficiency of evidence, contradictory testimonies, and the reliability of the recovery in the case.

The appellant had appealed against the conviction and sentence, challenging the evidence presented against him. The case revolved around the murder and kidnapping of Yashpal, a 14-year-old boy. The court’s decision was based on careful consideration of medical reports, disclosure statements, recovery memos, and the reliability of the evidence presented.

One of the key observations made by the court relates to the cause of death. The court emphasized that there was no conclusive evidence supporting a homicidal cause of death. The medical reports revealed mild congestion in the lungs, suggesting a natural cause of death, possibly due to a lung infection.

The court also raised doubts about the authenticity of the recovery of the deceased’s mobile phone and the purported extortionate messages sent from it. The messages exchanged lacked dates and circumstances, and the recovery of the mobile phone was questionable, as it was registered under a different name. The court noted that there was insufficient evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

“Insufficient evidence to establish appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt – Lack of credible evidence suggesting a homicidal cause of death – Doubts raised about authenticity of recovery and messages – Appeal allowed, appellant acquitted of charges,” the court concluded.

The judgement emphasizes the importance of credible evidence in establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and highlights the need for caution in cases involving serious offences. This verdict underscores the critical role of evidence in criminal cases and reaffirms the principles of justice and due process.

The appellant’s acquittal in this case highlights the significance of thorough examination of evidence and the necessity of a high standard of proof in criminal proceedings. This landmark judgement sets a precedent for similar cases, highlighting the necessity for conclusive and credible evidence before determining guilt in criminal matters.

Date of Decision: 01.8.2023

Dinesh Kumar vs State of Haryana

Similar News