UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Supreme Court Acquits Trio in Punjab Murder Case Citing Lack of Unlawful Assembly and Doubtful Witness Testimony

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court today acquitted three individuals in a 2003 home invasion and murder case in Punjab, underscoring the absence of an unlawful assembly and casting doubts on the reliability of witness testimonies.

The apex court’s decision pivoted around the non-establishment of an unlawful assembly under Section 141 of the IPC and the questionable identification of the accused by witnesses. The Court emphasized that for charges under Sections 460 and 302 with the aid of Section 149 of the IPC to stand, the existence of an unlawful assembly was imperative, a condition that was not met in this case.

The case involved a violent home invasion resulting in theft and the death of two individuals. The appellants, previously convicted by lower courts, appealed to the Supreme Court. Key issues included the reliability of eyewitness testimony, the absence of a test identification parade, and the legal significance of an unlawful assembly in sustaining convictions under various sections of the IPC.

The Supreme Court, led by Justice Abhay S. Oka, critically assessed the eyewitness accounts, noting inconsistencies and the failure to identify the assailants clearly. “The prosecution has failed to prove the commission of the offence,” observed Justice Oka. The Court also noted the non-examination of crucial witnesses and the doubtful identification of recovered ornaments.

The judgment revisited the principles surrounding unlawful assembly, eyewitness reliability, and the necessity of a test identification parade. The Court highlighted that for convictions under Section 148, 460, and 302 with the aid of Section 149, the formation of an unlawful assembly is a prerequisite.

The Supreme Court set aside the earlier judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, acquitting the appellants Kishore, Bala, and Banaras of all charges. The Court stated, “In the absence of cogent evidence, it is not possible to uphold the conviction,” leading to their acquittal.

Date of Decision: February 7, 2024. 

Kishore & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 

 

Latest Legal News