Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction U/S Section 304 Part II IPC - Dismissing Grounds of Inconsistencies and Non-Consideration of Defense Witness

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 18 May 2023, In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India upheld the conviction of an appellant in a criminal appeal challenging the application of Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The appellant had been sentenced to four years of imprisonment and a fine after being found guilty of the offense. The judgment, delivered by Justice Rajesh Bindal, addressed various aspects of the case, including discrepancies in the prosecution's evidence, witness statements, corroborative testimonies, medical evidence, and the defense's version of events.

The case revolved around an incident that occurred on September 14, 1992, involving a dispute over land between the appellant and the deceased. According to the prosecution's case, a scuffle ensued, during which the appellant, along with other individuals, allegedly attacked the deceased with a danda (stick), resulting in his death. The Trial Court initially acquitted the accused, but the judgment was reversed on appeal by the State.

The appellant challenged the High Court's decision, arguing that there were discrepancies in the prosecution's evidence and that the appellant should not have been convicted based on the statements of the eyewitnesses. The defense also contended that the appellant's version of events, supported by a defense witness, was not adequately considered. Furthermore, the defense emphasized the lengthy duration of the case and urged the court to consider the impact on the families involved.

After considering the arguments presented, the Supreme Court examined the evidence, including the statements of the eyewitnesses and medical testimony. The court noted minor variations in the witness statements but attributed them to inadvertent mistakes and the passage of time. It held that the corroborative testimonies provided strong support for the prosecution's case and that the medical evidence confirmed that the deceased had sustained a fatal head injury caused by a blunt weapon.

The defense's version of events, presented through a defense witness, was found to be inconsistent and lacking credibility. The witness's testimony contradicted various aspects of the defense's case, thereby weakening its impact. The court concluded that the High Court had appropriately reversed the Trial Court's acquittal based on the compelling evidence presented by the prosecution.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of considering the totality of the evidence and rejected the appellant's arguments challenging the conviction. Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court.

D.D-18May.2023

Gian Chand vs State of Himachal Pradesh       

Latest Legal News