Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Investigation by Trap Leader Prejudiced the Case: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Conviction in PC Case VAT | Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Cannot Reopen Assessment: Kerala High Court Fishing Inquiry Not Permissible Under Section 91, Cr.P.C.: High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Order Directing CBI to Produce Unrelied Statements and Case Diary Vague and Omnibus Allegations Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution in Matrimonial Disputes: Calcutta High Court High Court Emphasizes Assessee’s Burden of Proof in Unexplained Cash Deposits Case Effective, efficient, and expeditious alternative remedies have been provided by the statute: High Court Dismisses Petition for New Commercial Electricity Connection Permissive Use Cannot Ripen into Right of Prescriptive Easement: Kerala High Court High Court Slams Procedural Delays, Orders FSL Report in Assault Case to Prevent Miscarriage of Justice Petitioner Did Not Endorse Part-Payments on Cheque; Section 138 NI Act Not Attracted: Madras High Court Minority Christian Schools Not Bound by Rules of 2018; Disciplinary Proceedings Can Continue: High Court of Calcutta Absence of Receipts No Barrier to Justice: Madras High Court Orders Theft Complaint Referral Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C Rajasthan High Court Emphasizes Rehabilitation, Grants Probation to 67-Year-Old Convicted of Kidnapping" P&H High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Advocate Renuka Chopra: “A Frustrated Outburst Amid Systemic Challenges” Kerala High Court Criticizes Irregularities in Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection, Orders Compliance with Guidelines Non-Payment of Rent Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust: Calcutta High Court Administrative Orders Cannot Override Terminated Contracts: Rajasthan High Court Affirms in Landmark Decision Minimum Wage Claims Must Be Resolved by Designated Authorities Under the Minimum Wages Act, Not the Labour Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court Madras High Court Confirms Equal Coparcenary Rights for Daughters, Emphasizes Ancestral Property Rights Home Station Preferences Upheld in Transfer Case: Kerala High Court Overrules Tribunal on Teachers' Transfer Policy Failure to Formally Request Cross-Examination Does Not Invalidate Assessment Order: Calcutta 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 

 

Similar News