TIP Essential When Identity Based On Belated 'Alias' Claims; Conviction Can't Rest On Improved Witness Testimonies: Supreme Court Conviction Based On Flawed Identification Cannot Be Sustained In Law: Supreme Court Acquits Sri Lankan National In UAPA Case Penalty For Misdeclaration Of Power Capacity Is Strict Liability; No Need To Prove Intent Or 'Gaming': Supreme Court Authority To Appoint Includes Power To Dismiss; Visitor Can Terminate 'First Registrar' Under Transitional Provisions: Supreme Court State Cannot Use Delay Or Contractual Clauses To Deny Statutory Compensation For Land Acquisition: Supreme Court State As Model Employer Cannot Deny Regularization Benefits To Workers Due To Its Own Clerical Lapses: Supreme Court Section 106 Evidence Act | Husband’s Failure To Explain Wife’s Unnatural Death In Matrimonial Home Completes Chain Of Circumstances: Supreme Court Tender Condition For Out-Of-State Bidders To Submit EMD Via Demand Draft Not Mandatory If Clause Uses 'May': Supreme Court Affidavit Is Not 'Evidence' Under Section 3 Of Evidence Act Unless Court Orders Its Use Under Order XIX CPC: Supreme Court Exclusion Of Natural Heirs Not A 'Suspicious Circumstance' To Invalidate Will If Testator Provides Reason: Supreme Court 18-Year-Old Rendered 100% Disabled Entitled To Compensation For Loss Of Marriage Prospects And Dignity: Punjab & Haryana HC Right To Life Under Article 21 Prioritizes Preservation Of Mother's Life Over Reproductive Autonomy If Termination Poses Fatal Risk: J&K High Court Director’s Involvement In Company Affairs A Disputed Fact; High Court Cannot Conduct ‘Mini-Trial’ To Quash Section 138 NI Act Complaint: Punjab & Haryana HC Abuse Of Process: Bombay High Court Quashes FIRs Against Lawyer & Ex-Police Chief Sanjay Pandey; Says Complaints Motivated By Vengeance Magistrate Not Bound To Order FIR In Every Case Under Section 175(3) BNSS If Complainant Possesses All Evidence: Allahabad High Court High Court Can Initiate Suo Motu Inquiry Against Judicial Officers Based On Information; Sworn Affidavit Not Mandatory: Gujarat High Court Lack Of Videography, Independent Witnesses During Contraband Seizure Relevant Factors For Granting Bail Under NDPS Act: Delhi High Court

Unreliable Witness Testimony and Unsubstantiated Motive. Inherent Flaws in Prosecution's Version Led to Acquittal: Supreme Court Quashes Conviction in Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement reversed the convictions by the Sessions Court and High Court, highlighting the unreliability of eyewitness testimony and the improbability of the prosecution's narrative in a murder case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Supreme Court meticulously analyzed the reliability of witness testimonies, the veracity of the alleged motive and presence at the crime scene, and the handling of the extra-judicial confession. The Court highlighted major discrepancies and contradictions in witness statements and the lack of corroborative evidence, leading to the acquittal of the appellant, Dharambir @ Dharma.

Dharambir was convicted for the murder of Karambir based on eyewitness testimony by the victim's brother and an alleged extra-judicial confession. The motive was suspected illicit relations between the victim and the appellant's wife. However, the presence of Dharambir at the crime scene and his motive were not substantiated beyond reasonable doubt, leading to legal scrutiny by the apex court.

Reliability of Eyewitnesses: The Court noted "grave contradictions" in the testimony of the main witness, Krishan Kumar (PW-5), including discrepancies about the time of the incident and lack of physical evidence (blood stains) that could substantiate his presence at the crime scene.

Examination of Motive and Presence at the Crime Scene: The alleged motive was not only weak but also unsupported by any solid evidence. The accused's presence at the cinema at the same time as the victim was considered "highly improbable" by the Court.

Judicial Handling of Extra Judicial Confessions: The Court reiterated that extra-judicial confessions are inherently weak evidence and require significant corroborative support, which was absent in this case. The confession was discredited due to contradictions and the lack of corroborative evidence.

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashing the previous convictions and acquitted Dharambir, citing the unreliability of key witness testimonies and the uncorroborated nature of the extra-judicial confession.

Date of Decision: 16th April 2024

Dharambir @ Dharma v. State of Haryana

Latest Legal News