Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Supreme Court Overturns Conviction, Cites ‘Pervasive Errors’ in Evidence Assessment in Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has acquitted the accused in a murder case, highlighting significant flaws in the evaluation of evidence presented in the trial. The case pertains to the conviction of the appellants under Sections 201, 300, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 34, stemming from a murder committed in June 1999.

Delivered on August 8, 2023, the ruling was handed down by a bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar. The Supreme Court meticulously examined the judgments of the trial court and the high court, ultimately concluding that the convictions were unsustainable due to the pervasive errors in the assessment of evidence.

At the heart of the case were critical issues such as the reliability of an extra judicial confession, the recovery of the weapon, and the establishment of motive. The court stressed that an extra judicial confession necessitates corroboration, which the witness who allegedly received the confession failed to provide. Inconsistencies in the witness’s testimony and the absence of vital details undermined the confession’s credibility.

Regarding the recovery of the weapon, deemed crucial for the prosecution’s case, the court observed that the lack of an independent witness and the public accessibility of the recovery location diminished its weight as evidence. The court highlighted the need for robust corroborative evidence for such recoveries.

The court also addressed the motive, noting that the prosecution struggled to establish a clear and compelling reason linking the appellants to the crime. The motives presented lacked cohesion and lacked substantial evidence connecting them to the accused.

The judgment referenced several cases to underscore the importance of meticulous evidence assessment, emphasizing the need to thoroughly evaluate witness credibility and corroborative evidence. The court noted that both the trial court and high court judgments fell short in properly scrutinizing inconsistencies, discrepancies, and the absence of corroboration.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court concluded that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In light of this, the appellants were acquitted, and their bail bonds were discharged.

Date of Decision: August 08, 2023

Krishan Kumar & Anr.vs The State of Haryana     

Latest Legal News