Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka 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

Latest Legal News