Supreme Court Acquits Man in Murder Case Citing Suspicious Recovery and Unreliable Eyewitness Testimony

Share:
airport fundamental Election Supreme v Police 300A Hindu Supreme Court Accident proceedings Medical property bail 196 506 Date of Decision: May 16, 2024 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/s Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. & Ors. Evidence Punjab Courts Act 144 CPC Compliance Court Father Timely Evidence Police Dowry condonatioMurder n Bail Bail Insurance Crime Evidence © All Rights Reserved @ LAWYER E NEWS *Disclaimer: Always compare with the original copy of judgment from the official website. punishment Technical criminal Homebuyers SARFAESI Judgment Telangana Bail Order murderWorkman Evidence National Property LPG Employee Report suit Suicide Notice Rape Electoral Bond Breach Article 142 bail duty custody skills legal 2025 Summoning recovery Constitutional Bail property nclt army validity police governance evidence teachers bail property jurisdiction evidence Possession amendment life land evidence causes degree absence

In a latest judgment, the Supreme Court of India acquitted an appellant, Krishan, in a murder case underlining the principle of ‘benefit of doubt’ due to suspicious recovery of the weapon and unreliable eyewitness testimony. The case, presided over by Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, was decided on January 25, 2024, under Criminal Appeal No. 2351 of 2011.

Krishan was initially convicted for the offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act, along with co-accused Mahesh, and sentenced to life imprisonment. The conviction primarily hinged on the recovery of a weapon and the accounts of two eyewitnesses, who later turned hostile.

In its decision, the Supreme Court observed, “As neither PW-1 nor PW-3 supported the prosecution, what remains to be considered is only the evidence of alleged recovery at the instance of the appellant.” The judgment further noted the inconsistencies in the recovery of the weapon, stating, “The recovery was made from open space in a garden… the place was easily accessible to many.”

Highlighting the critical aspects of the investigation, the Court remarked, “The police have not investigated the role played by the said Naresh Yadav, who, according to PW-2, the brother of the deceased, was on inimical terms with the deceased.” This lack of thorough investigation into alternative suspects and motives significantly weakened the prosecution’s case.

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, underscored the importance of reliable evidence and thorough investigation in criminal cases, reiterating that doubts should be resolved in favor of the accused. “The benefit of doubt must be extended to the appellant,” the judgment declared, leading to Krishan’s acquittal.

Date of Decision: 25 January 2024

KRISHAN VS STATE OF HARYANA           

            

Download Judgment

Share: