Noorahammad & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 304 , Section 324 , Section 353 , Section 379 , Section 411 , Section 34
304 part II - Murder - Appeal against Conviction - Appreciation of evidence - In the post mortem report of the deceased, the presence of a surgical wound on the left side of the head, measuring 13cms long extending vertically upwards from point 1.5cms above and in front of left ear, has remained unexplained by the prosecution - It is another lacuna in the prosecution story which casts a shadow of doubt on the same and the benefit of which should certainly go to the accused-appellants.
304 part II - Murder - Conviction by High Court Set aside - Appreciation of evidence - Judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court reversed by High Court - Material contradictions in prosecution evidence - These cast a shadow of doubt upon the prosecution story and render the same unreliable and not trustworthy in the eyes of law, which the High Court has failed to appreciate - Impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court liable to be set aside - All the accused- appellants are acquitted of all the charges levelled against them.
304 part II - Test Identification - Prosecution witness identified the accused-appellants in court for the first time, during trial, in the year 1997-98 and the incident occurred in the year 1995 - Thus, after considering some undisputed facts like occurrence of incident at night, at a place with improper lighting and all the accusedappellants were not known to the forest officers, except one present at the place of incident, there should have been TIP conducted at the instance of the investigating officer - Identification of the accusedappellants by the prosecution witness for the first time after a gap of more than 2 years from the date of incident is not beyond reasonable doubt, the same should be seen with suspicion.
Topic(s)-Murder - Conviction by High Court Set aside - Acquittal