Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Assault Case, Citing Lack of Clear Evidence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court of India acquitted Boini Mahipal and Anr. In a criminal appeal related to an assault case. The judgment, delivered by Justice Aravind Kumar, highlighted the lack of clear evidence and failure of the prosecution to establish the appellants’ involvement beyond reasonable doubt.

The headline quote from the judgment, “The prosecution failed to establish clear evidence of appellants’ involvement in the assault,” succinctly captures the essence of the court’s decision.

The case revolved around the allegation that the appellants, along with other accused individuals, assaulted the deceased. However, the prosecution’s case primarily relied on witness testimonies that attributed the act of kicking the deceased solely to accused No. 1, without mentioning any overt acts by the appellants.

Justice Kumar, in the judgment, emphasized that “the witnesses consistently stated that it was accused No. 1 who kicked the deceased, and no other overt acts were attributed to the appellants.” This observation underscored the lack of evidence supporting the conviction of the appellants.

Furthermore, the court highlighted the prosecution’s failure to provide any corroborative material or produce evidence of injuries sustained by the deceased’s relatives. This contributed to the court’s finding that the conviction could not be sustained without incriminating material or corroborative evidence.

The quote, “Failure to establish appellants’ participation or common intention in the assault,” encapsulates the court’s reasoning behind setting aside the conviction and ultimately acquitting the appellants.

The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the conviction brings closure to the case, underscoring the importance of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt and ensuring justice based on solid evidence.

Date of Decision: July 19, 2023

BOINI MAHIPAL AND ANR   vs STATE OF TELANGANA 

Latest Legal News