PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 201-- Murder of wife by husband - No iota of evidence on record that deceased was subjected to any kind of cruelty or harassment at the hands of accused or his family - Presence of accused as well as complainant and other relatives at the time of recovery of dead body of deceased reflects that all of..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 304-- Nature of offence - Incident occurred on the spur of moment and in an uncontrollable, embittered and agitated state of enragement, thus, depriving accused of their power of self control - There was no pre-mediation or prior concert on the part of accused to commit murder of deceased - Though..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 154, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34-- Delayed FIR - Murder case - Offence committed at around 4-5 p.m - Registration of FIR at police station between 7.30 to 8.00 p.m. - No reason to draw adverse inference, particularly when after occurrence, deceased was taken to nearby nursing home where he was declared dead and body remained there..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 157, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34-- Delay in sending FIR to Magistrate - Murder case - Where recording of FIR is proved on record, mere delay of 5 days in dispatch of FIR from the police station to Magistrate Court has no bearing on the basis of which any adverse inference can be drawn, particularly when no questions were put to I.O..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 34-- Murder - Testimony of eye-witnesses - Deceased and accused both belong to same locality - Occurrence was witnessed by several witnesses including eye witnesses who proved prosecution case - All the eye witnesses deposed in one voice regarding presence of accused at the place of occurrence, about..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 324, 148-- Murder - Eye witness - Incident took place in 1999 - Evidence of PW3, alleged eye witness first time recorded in 2004 - Name of PW3 was not mentioned in the list of witnesses - High Court rightly held, that PW3 was not an eye witness to occurrence...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 324, 148-- Murder - No eye witness to the incident - Father of deceased who witnessed the incident expired before completion of trial - PW3 an alleged witness rightly discarded by High Court as a planted witness - Testimony of only other witness PW7 is extremely indirect - No evidence on record that accused..........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 307, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 8-- Murder of wife by husband - Mere fact that accused three days prior to incident stopped working and had sold his Rehri, even if accepted, does not bring forth any preparation for commission of murder of deceased by accused, particularly when accused never used Rehri to sell his vegetables...........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 307, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 8-- Murder of wife by husband - Circumstantial evidence - Motive - Mere suspicion by PWs on accused that he suspected the character of deceased that third child to deceased was not born out of the wedlock of accused and deceased, it cannot be said that accused has a motive to commit the murder of..........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2016
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 307-- Murder of wife by husband - Attempt to murder daughter - Circumstantial evidence - Accused acquitted as circumstances established do not bring forth a chain of circumstances as : (i) Accused was not present in the home at the time of incident and thus, abscondance of accused at the spot does not..........