Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

To Convict on Circumstantial Evidence Chain must be Completed-Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Supreme Court held in the recent Judgement ( Raju @ Rajendra Prasad v. State of Rajasthan)  that circumstantial evidence must consist of a chain of events that is so thorough that it is impossible to draw any other conclusion than that the accused committed the crime.

 Rajasthan High Court dismiss the appeals filed by the appellants and convict them of the offence under Section 302 IPC.

Appellant Contended that the case is supported by circumstantial evidence. There is absolutely no direct evidence. It was argued that there isn't a shred of evidence against the appellants that would allow one to conclude that they murdered the deceased.

Supreme court held that It is necessary to highlight that the case is supported only by circumstantial evidence. There isn't any concrete evidence to support the claim that the appellants killed or murdered the deceased. There is no direct evidence that the appellants were involved in the crime, and as was noted above, the prosecution's case is supported only by circumstantial evidence. To support a conviction, circumstantial evidence must be complete and incapable of explaining any other hypothesis than that of the accused's guilt. This evidence must also not only be consistent with the accused's guilt but also form a chain of circumstances that is so long that there is no possible way to avoid the conclusion that the accused committed the crime and no one else.

The prosecution has failed to establish the full sequence of events and guilt, according to the Supreme Court, which leaves only the possibility that the appellants - accused alone - committed murder and/or killed the deceased.

The court believed that by finding the appellants guilty of the crime under Section 302/34 IPC based on such circumstantial evidence, the Trial Court and the High Court had made a very severe mistake. The appellants' conviction for the crime listed in Section 302/34 IPC is not upheld.

Raju @ Rajendra Prasad

VS

State of Rajasthan

Download Judgment

[gview file="http://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/4.pdf"]

Latest Legal News