Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |    

Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Acquittal in a Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the acquittal of the accused in a murder case by the High Court. The apex court, in its ruling, emphasized the importance of establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt in cases based on circumstantial evidence.

Bench comprising Hon'ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Justice Manoj Misra stated, "Normally, this Court is reluctant to interfere with an order of acquittal. But when it appears that the High Court has on an absolutely wrong process of reasoning and a legally erroneous and perverse approach to the facts of the case and ignoring some of the most vital facts, acquitted the respondent and the order of acquittal passed by the High Court has resulted in a grave and substantial miscarriage of justice, extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India may rightfully be exercised."

The case involved the State of Punjab as the appellant and Kewal Krishan as the respondent. The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including the last seen circumstance, discovery of the deceased's body, an alleged extra-judicial confession, and the recovery of a knife. However, the High Court had set aside the conviction and acquitted the accused, casting doubt on the reliability of witnesses and the evidentiary value of the circumstances presented.

The Supreme Court, while considering the appeal, highlighted the need to establish each incriminating circumstance beyond reasonable doubt and to form a complete chain of evidence pointing towards the accused's guilt. The Court agreed with the High Court's doubts regarding the witness's disclosure, the inconclusiveness of the last seen circumstance, uncertainties surrounding the recovery of the weapon, and the weak nature of the alleged extra-judicial confession.

The bench further stated, "The High Court was justified in doubting the testimony of the witness and finding the last seen circumstance inconclusive in pointing towards the guilt of the accused by excluding other hypotheses consistent with his innocence."

The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the order of acquittal passed by the High Court, as it found no justification to interfere with the plausible view taken by the High Court.

This judgment reiterates the significance of ensuring a thorough analysis of circumstantial evidence and the need for a complete chain of evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It serves as a reminder that the principles of justice require careful scrutiny and a high threshold of proof in criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence.

DATE OF DECISION: June 21, 2023  

STATE OF PUNJAB vs KEWAL KRISHAN

Similar News