Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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