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 AFFIRMS ACQUITTAL IN MURDER CASE – FAILURE TO ESTABLISH A COMPLETE CHAIN OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the acquittal of the accused in a criminal appeal in a murder case that garnered widespread attention. The case, titled Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) v. Shyam Bihari & Others, involved the Central Bureau of Investigation appealing against the judgment and order of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital.

The Supreme Court bench, headed by Justice Manoj Misra, rendered its decision on July 17, 2023. The appeal sought to overturn the acquittal of the accused by the trial court in a case related to the killing of Raj Kumar Baliyan in 1987.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court cited insufficient evidence and a failure to establish a complete chain of circumstances to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Justice Manoj Misra stated in the judgment, “The ocular accounts of the witnesses failed to positively identify the accused as the perpetrators. The recovery of empty cartridges from the crime scene raised doubts about the involvement of other persons and the exact circumstances of the incident.”

The Court further emphasized that the cause of death was determined to be a gunshot from a .12 bore weapon, which contradicted the use of service rifles by the accused. As a result, the Court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish a direct link between the accused and the cause of death.

Justice Manoj Misra further remarked, “The circumstances found proved do not constitute a chain so far complete as to indicate that it was the accused persons and no one else who committed the crime. In such a situation, the trial court was justified in extending the benefit of doubt to the accused.”

The Supreme Court’s decision affirms the High Court’s earlier ruling, dismissing the Government Appeal filed by the CBI. The judgment highlights the importance of a complete and robust evidentiary chain in criminal cases, ensuring guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

The case has drawn significant attention from legal experts and the public alike, shedding light on the complexities involved in criminal proceedings and the burden of proof placed on the prosecution.

DATE OF DECISION: July 17, 2023

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION vs SHYAM BIHARI & OTHERS     

Latest Legal News