Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

TIP Compromised Due to Prior Exposure of Accused's Photographs, Undermining Credibility: Gujarat High Court Uphold Acquittal in Robbery Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Gujarat High Court has upheld the acquittal of XXX and others in a high-profile robbery and assault case, citing significant procedural lapses and insufficient evidence presented by the prosecution. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Nirzar S. Desai and Hasmukh D. Suthar, reinforces the principle of presumption of innocence and the necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Observations and Views:

Reliability of Test Identification Parade (TIP):

The court scrutinized the reliability of the TIP conducted eight months after the incident, during which the accused’s photographs were published in newspapers. "The TIP was compromised due to prior exposure of the accused’s photographs, which undermines its credibility," the bench noted. The procedural lapses in the TIP were significant enough to dismiss its value as evidence.

Justice Desai observed, "The TIP conducted after such a prolonged delay and subsequent media exposure does not inspire confidence and cannot be relied upon as substantive evidence."

Recovery of Stolen Property:

The prosecution's claim of recovering stolen goods in a melted form was also critically evaluated. The court found the identification of these goods impossible, further weakened by the fact that key panch witnesses had turned hostile and proper procedures under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act were not followed.

Legal Reasoning:

The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to the principles of criminal jurisprudence, particularly the presumption of innocence. The court stated, "The prosecution must prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt. In the absence of credible evidence, the benefit of the doubt must go to the accused."

Quotes from the Judgment:

"The presumption of innocence is not weakened by the fact that the trial court has acquitted the accused. This principle is fundamental to our criminal justice system," remarked Justice Suthar.

Conclusion:

The Gujarat High Court's decision to uphold the trial court's acquittal of the accused underscores the critical importance of procedural integrity and compelling evidence in criminal trials. This judgment highlights the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding the rights of the accused and ensuring that convictions are based on solid, reliable evidence. The case sets a significant precedent for future criminal trials, particularly concerning the reliability of identification procedures and the necessity of adhering to legal protocols.

Date of Decision: 22nd May 2024

State of Gujarat v. XXX

Latest Legal News