Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

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

Latest Legal News