“Any lingering doubt about the involvement of an accused in the crime he is accused of committing, must weigh on the mind of the court and in such a situation, the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused.”
“The yardstick to be applied in cases where the appointment sought relates to a Law Enforcement Agency, ought to be much more stringent than those applied to a routine vacancy.”
“The res ipsa loquitur is applicable in a civil action under the tort and the same cannot be pressed into service in a criminal case to prove negligence.”
The daughter was 16 years and 4 months old studying in class 11 when she allegedly witnessed her father being shot with a gun by two people, then herself being fastened with the charges of killing her father.
The Supreme Court opined that the evidence has to be scrutinized so as to ensure that the totality of the evidence and circumstances relied on, did constitute a complete chain and directly points to the guilt of the convict.
The Telangana High Court upheld the conviction of a husband under Section 498A of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) despite there being contradictions in the dying declarations as there were consistent statements about abuse and cruelty committed on the wife in all the dying declarations.
“The prosecution has to bring home the charges levelled against them beyond reasonable doubt, which the prosecution has failed to do in the instant case, resultantly, the Court is left with no alternative but to acquit the accused, though involved in a very heinous crime.”
Punjab and Haryana High Court: While dismissing the instant appeal preferred by the appellant against the order dated 01-05-2019 of
Punjab and Haryana High Court: While deciding the instant appeal preferred by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and
Allahabad High Court: Samit Gopal, J. acquitted the appellant of the charges leveled against him of Section 307 of Penal
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath*, JJ., reversed the impugned judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High
“The suspicion howsoever strong cannot take place of proof.”
Calcutta High Court: Bibek Chaudhury, J. allowed an appeal which was filed assailing the judgment and order of conviction passed by the
Tripura High Court: Arindam Lodh J. quashed the judgement and order which was originally passed by the special judge (POCSO) West Tripura
Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: The Division Bench of Devika Abeyratne and P. Kumararatnam, JJ., allowed
Armed Forces Tribunal: Division Bench of Justice Umesh Chandra Srivastava (Chairperson) and Vice Admiral Abhay Raghunath Karve (Member) A, allowed the application
The finding of guilt cannot be based purely on the refusal of the accused to undergo an identification parade.
“… the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond doubt the appellants therefore must be given benefit of doubt.”
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Anoop Chitkara, J., dismissed an appeal filed challenging the acquittal of the accused of the commission of offences
Calcutta High Court: A Division Bench of Sanjib Banerjee and Suvra Ghosh, JJ. allowed the appeal filed by two persons who were