0

Burden of Proof Not Met: Supreme Court Overturns Murder Conviction.

Blog , , , , , , , ,

CASE TITLE – Sharanappa v. State of Karnataka

CASE NUMBER – Criminal Appeal No. 1673 of 2011

DATED ON – 04.10.2023

QUORUM – Justice Abhay S. Oka & Justice Pankaj Mithal

 

FACTS OF THE CASE

The appellant was convicted by the Trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”). For the offence under Section 302, the Trial Court sentenced the appellant to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand). In the appeal, by the impugned judgment, the High Court has confirmed the conviction. The deceased is Meenakshi with whom the appellant married on Basavajayanti day in the year 2003 in a mass marriage programme. The case of the prosecution is that on 28th May, 2004 PW-3 Alfred Mathai saw the appellant in the company of the deceased near Mariyapura Bus Stop. On 30th May, 2004 a body of a female person was recovered in a decomposed state. The body was identified as that of the deceased wife of the appellant. The prosecution case is that on 28th May, 2004 itself, the appellant informed his father-in-law that his wife was missing. However, he did not file a missing complaint. The appellant filed a missing complaint on 31st May, 2004. The First Information Report was registered on the basis of the complaint filed by appellant’s father-in-law on 1st June, 2004. The allegation made therein was that the appellant suspected that his wife was living an adulterous life and that was pleaded as a motive to kill the deceased. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. The first circumstance is of last seen together. The second circumstance is of the recovery of knife allegedly used as a weapon of offence by the appellant, at the instance of the appellant. The third circumstance is that though even according to the appellant, the deceased was missing since 28th May, 2004, he never filed a missing complaint till 31st May, 2004 and he did so after getting the knowledge of the fact that the dead body of his wife was found on earlier day.

 

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution has been able to successfully prove the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

CONTENTIONS BY THE APPELLANT

The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the evidence of the witness, PW-3 Alfred Mathai is wholly unreliable. He also brought the Court’s attention to the evidence of the alleged witnesses to the Recovery Memorandum of alleged recovery of the knife at the instance of the appellant. He submitted that both the witnesses have not supported the prosecution. His submission was that both the important circumstances which constitute the chain of circumstances against the appellant have not been established.

 

CONTENTIONS BY THE RESPONDENT

The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent-State, while supporting the impugned judgment, submitted that the Trial Court and the High Court have analyzed the evidence of PW-3 and found that his version was reliable. His submission was that the appellant has not explained a very important circumstance against him that from 28th May, 2004 to 31st May, 2004 he did not lodge even a missing report with the police. He submitted that only after he came to know about the recovery of body of his wife, he lodged missing complaint.

 

COURT ANALYSIS AND JUDGMENT

The Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that it is the duty of the prosecution to establish all the circumstances forming a part of the chain, and noted that the first and the most important circumstance relied upon by the prosecution was of last seen together, the only witness examined to prove the said circumstance was PW-3 Alfred Mathai. In the cross-examination, The Court observed that the witness stated that he had not stated anything before the police which is found in his statement Exhibit D-1 which was recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Further, he stated that only when he went to the police station he came to know who the accused was and also whose dead body it was. Thus, it was crystal clear that what was stated by the PW-3 Alfred Mathai in his examination-in-chief is a complete improvement. Therefore the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that it was impossible to believe his testimony. Hence, the theory of the prosecution about the last seen together must fail. So far as the case of the prosecution regarding recovery of the weapon of the offence at the instance of the appellant is concerned, the Court found that both PW-4 and PW-5 were allegedly the witnesses to the mazhar have not supported the prosecution. PW-4 stated that he signed the mazhar at the police station. PW-5 did not depose before the Court that the appellant, while in police custody, stated that he was aware about the place at which he had concealed the weapon of the offence. Therefore, even the second circumstance pleaded by the prosecution was not at all established. The Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that only on the basis of the third circumstance based on the conduct of the appellant, the appellant cannot be convicted. Hence, the appeal succeeded and was accordingly allowed. And the impugned judgments were set aside and also acquited the appellant of the offences alleged against him.

 

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgment Reviewed by – Gnaneswarran Beemarao

Click here to view full Judgment

0

Supreme Court Decision: DGP Vindicated in High-Profile Legal Battle

Blog , , ,

Case Title – Sanjay Kundu vs. Registrar General, High Court of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

Case No. – SLP (Crl.) No. 550-551 of 2024

Dated on – 12th January, 2024

Quorum – Hon’ble CJI Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Hon’ble Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Justice Manoj Misra

Facts of the case –

An email was sent by Nishant Kumar Sharma to the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. Sharma, a resident of Palampur, Kangra, alleged that he and his family were being threatened by “X,” a former IPS officer, and “Y,” a practicing advocate, to sell their shares in their company. Sharma’s family operates a hotel in Palampur, and “Y” is a relative who had invested in their company.

Sharma claimed that “Y” was pressuring him through “X” and using intimidation tactics, including threatening the company’s auditors and obstructing its functioning. He also alleged that he escaped an assault in Gurugram on August 25, 2023, and that he received phone calls from the office of Sanjay Kundu, the DGP of Himachal Pradesh, purportedly at “Y’s” behest. Sharma reported receiving a WhatsApp message from the SHO, Palampur, stating that Kundu wished to speak with him and insisted that he come to Shimla. Despite filing multiple criminal complaints, no FIR was initially registered. It was only after the High Court took suo motu cognizance of the email that an FIR was registered on November 16, 2023. The High Court, upon reviewing status reports, found prima facie evidence of abuse of power by Kundu and directed that he be transferred from his post to ensure a fair investigation.

Legal Provisions –

  • Section 34 of IPC, 1860
  • Section 323 of IPC, 1860
  • Section 506 of IPC, 1860

Contentions of the appellant –

The appellant, Sanjay Kundu, contended that the High Court’s order directing his transfer from the post of DGP, Himachal Pradesh, was issued without affording him an opportunity to be heard, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. Kundu argued that the proceedings were initiated suo motu based on an email from the complainant, Nishant Kumar Sharma, without impleading him as a party or notifying him of the allegations.

Kundu admitted to having requested the complainant to come to Shimla, which he justified as an attempt to mediate a civil dispute at the behest of “Y,” a senior advocate. He maintained that his actions were misconstrued and that his official role was being wrongly implicated in a private business dispute between the complainant and “Y.” Kundu further submitted that the High Court had improperly assumed disciplinary jurisdiction by directing his transfer without due process, thereby bypassing the established administrative control and disciplinary mechanisms governing his service.

Additionally, Kundu raised concerns about the impartiality of the investigation led by the SP, Shimla, citing prior conflicts related to a blast investigation in Shimla. He alleged that the SP, Shimla, had an adversarial stance against him due to his intervention in the blast investigation, which he claimed was mishandled by the SP. Kundu emphasized that the High Court’s reliance on status reports from potentially biased officers compromised the fairness of the proceedings. Consequently, he sought the recall of the High Court’s order and a fresh hearing where he could present his defense.

Contentions of the respondent –

The respondent, Nishant Kumar Sharma, contended that Sanjay Kundu, in his capacity as DGP of Himachal Pradesh, abused his official position to intimidate and coerce the complainant into settling a private business dispute with “Y,” a senior advocate and business associate. Sharma alleged that Kundu’s actions were not only unauthorized but also constituted a misuse of power, as evidenced by persistent surveillance, intimidation through frequent missed calls, and attempts to force him to meet in Shimla.

The respondent argued that the High Court’s intervention was necessary due to the severity and persistence of the threats, which included a physical assault and subsequent intimidation to withdraw criminal complaints. Sharma asserted that Kundu’s influence prevented the local police from acting on his complaints until the High Court’s intervention. The respondent supported the High Court’s decision to transfer Kundu to ensure a fair and unbiased investigation, emphasizing the prima facie evidence of Kundu’s involvement in the alleged intimidation.

Sharma further contended that Kundu’s request for a recall of the High Court’s order was baseless, as the need for an independent and impartial investigation justified the initial ex parte decision. He maintained that the investigation by the SP, Shimla, was conducted with due diligence and that Kundu’s allegations of bias were unfounded and aimed at diverting attention from the substantive issues. The respondent urged the Court to uphold the High Court’s directives, including the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the matter comprehensively.

 

Court Analysis and Judgement –

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India addressed the legality of the High Court’s order directing the transfer of Sanjay Kundu, the Director General of Police (DGP) of Himachal Pradesh, amidst allegations of abuse of power and interference in a private dispute. The Court acknowledged that the High Court’s initial order was issued ex parte without affording Kundu an opportunity to present his side, thereby violating principles of natural justice. It criticized the High Court’s assumption of disciplinary jurisdiction over Kundu, emphasizing that such decisions should have been subject to established administrative procedures and due process within the framework of service rules.

The Supreme Court highlighted the seriousness of the allegations against Kundu, including surveillance and intimidation tactics allegedly employed against Nishant Kumar Sharma, the complainant. However, the Court found that the High Court’s reliance on status reports from potentially biased officers, without proper scrutiny or opportunity for rebuttal by Kundu, compromised procedural fairness. The Court noted Kundu’s admission to contacting Sharma in the course of his duties but disputed the characterization of these actions as improper interference in a private matter.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order directing Kundu’s transfer from the post of DGP. It directed the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising IG-level officers to conduct an impartial inquiry into the allegations against Kundu. The Court mandated that Kundu shall have no authority over this investigation to ensure its independence and impartiality. Additionally, the State Government was tasked with providing adequate security to Sharma and his family based on an assessment of threat perception. The judgment underscored the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to legal principles in disciplinary actions against public servants, while affirming the need for a thorough investigation into the allegations raised in the case.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – Anurag Das

0

“Demand and Acceptance”: Upholding Electronic Evidence in Corruption Cases

Blog , ,

Case Title – Sayyad Shakil Salam vs. The State of Maharashtra

Case No. – Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 2019

Dated on – 14th June, 2024

Quorum – Hon’ble Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke

 

Facts of the case –

The accused, a public servant, was charged under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, for allegedly demanding and accepting a bribe from the complainant, Dongarsingh Yadav (PW1). The complainant alleged that the accused demanded an illegal gratification, which was recorded using a digital voice recorder provided by the investigating authorities. The conversation between the complainant and the accused was subsequently transcribed and produced as evidence. The prosecution also submitted a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to authenticate the electronic evidence. The forensic analysis of the audio recording confirmed the match between the recorded voices and the accused’s specimen voice. Despite the defense’s objections to the admissibility of the electronic evidence, the trial court admitted the evidence and convicted the accused, leading to the present appeal.

 

Legal Provisions –

  • Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
  • Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
  • Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

 

Contentions of the Appellant –

The appellant contended that the electronic evidence presented by the prosecution was inadmissible due to non-compliance with the requirements under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The appellant argued that the SD card used for recording the conversation was not produced alongside the Section 65B certificate, rendering the electronic evidence untrustworthy. Additionally, the appellant emphasized that the Shadow Pancha (PW2), Shantaram Yewale, did not corroborate the complainant’s testimony regarding the demand and acceptance of the bribe, asserting that he did not hear the conversation between the complainant and the accused. The appellant further claimed that the prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond a reasonable doubt, as required under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant maintained that the mere recovery of the tainted money was insufficient to sustain a conviction without concrete evidence of demand and acceptance.

 

Contentions of the Respondent –

The respondent contended that the prosecution had duly complied with the requirements under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, by producing both the SD card and the accompanying certificate. They argued that PW6 Sachin Halmare, a duly authorized person, provided credible testimony regarding the transcription and issued the necessary hash value certificate, fulfilling all legal prerequisites for the admissibility of electronic evidence. The respondent emphasized that the complainant’s testimony (PW1) was consistent and corroborated by the electronic evidence, which clearly demonstrated the demand and acceptance of the bribe by the accused. They contended that the circumstantial evidence, including the recorded conversation and the subsequent forensic analysis confirming the voice of the accused, substantiated the prosecution’s case. The respondent further argued that the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, was correctly invoked, as the evidence established both the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification. They maintained that the accused’s explanation was insufficient to rebut this presumption and that the trial court rightly convicted and sentenced the accused based on the comprehensive evidence presented.

 

Court Analysis and Judgement –

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court meticulously analyzed the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly focusing on the admissibility and reliability of the electronic evidence. It noted that the prosecution had duly complied with the requirements under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, by producing both the SD card and the certificate, thereby fulfilling the legal prerequisites for the admissibility of electronic records. The court found the testimony of PW1, the complainant, to be consistent and corroborative, particularly supported by the recorded conversation which demonstrated the demand and acceptance of the bribe by the accused. The forensic analysis further confirmed the accused’s voice in the recorded conversation, strengthening the prosecution’s case. The court emphasized that the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, was correctly invoked, as the evidence satisfactorily established the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification. The court rejected the appellant’s defense that the money was placed on his table without his knowledge, finding it insufficient to rebut the presumption of guilt. The court upheld the trial court’s conviction, concluding that the prosecution had successfully proven the elements of the offense under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the said Act beyond a reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed By- Anurag Das

 

0

College Teacher’s Apology Not Enough to Dismiss Criminal Charges: Madras High Court.

Blog , , , ,

The Madras High Court ruled yesterday that a criminal case against a college teacher in Chennai cannot be quashed, stating that teacher protests on college campuses are a serious concern that cannot be encouraged.

A letter of apology from the petitioner-teacher was rejected by Justice G Jayachandran in an order dated June 13, and further stated that the criminal case against him could not be quashed. The petitioner, having resorted to violent protests within the college grounds, cannot circumvent judicial procedures by simply providing a letter of apology, the High Court further stated.

“An affidavit of apology cannot be entertained to quash the prosecution launched for offence of this kind. Criminal Procedure Code provides for bargain, or plead guilty or compound. Bye-passing the procedures and quashing criminal prosecution, by obtaining apology letter for an act of violence inside the college campus by the teaching staff is not in the interest of justice. Hence, quash petition is dismissed,” the Court stated.

Following a complaint filed by the interim administrator of the Trust, a retired High Court judge, in 2019, T.V. Swaminathan (Petitioner) and a number of other teaching and non-teaching staff members were arrested by the city police. According to the complaint, when the college committee meeting was scheduled to take place on campus, the petitioner and other participants organized protests. The temporary administrator, who was appointed by the High Court for streamlining the administration of the Trust-run institute, was to preside over the meeting. The petitioner is free to appear before the trial court to request relief by “either resorting to plea bargain or by compounding,” according to Justice Jayachandran.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By – Gnaneswarran Beemarao

0

Karnataka’s Political Scandal Deepens: Fourth FIR Filed Against Ex-MP Prajwal Revanna in Sexual Assault Probe.

Blog , , , ,

Prajwal Revanna, a former Member of Parliament from the Janata Dal (Secular) party, finds himself at the center of a major scandal that has rocked Karnataka’s political landscape. The controversy erupted in late April 2024, just before the Lok Sabha elections, when over 2,900 video clips allegedly from Revanna’s mobile phones were leaked to the public. These leaks triggered a series of sexual misconduct allegations against the politician, leading to multiple legal cases.

The first FIR was filed on April 28, 2024, by a woman who had worked as a house help for the Revanna family. She accused both Prajwal Revanna and his father, HD Revanna, of rape. This initial case raised alarming questions about the potential extent of the alleged misconduct within the Revanna household.

A second FIR followed on May 2, 2024, when a 44-year-old political worker accused Prajwal of rape. The alleged assault reportedly occurred in his official quarters in Hassan city in 2021. The complainant claimed Revanna recorded the assault and used the footage for blackmail, forcing her into further sexual encounters between January 1, 2021, and April 25, 2024.

On May 8, 2024, a third FIR was registered based on a complaint from another house help, a woman in her sixties from Mysuru. Revanna was booked for repeated rape in this case, further intensifying the legal pressure on the former MP.

The latest and fourth FIR, filed in June 2024, involves accusations of sexual assault and non-consensual recording of private video calls. The victim reportedly initially contacted Revanna regarding her son’s school admission, after which he allegedly began making inappropriate video calls. This FIR also implicates three others: former BJP MLA Preetham Gowda and two associates, Kiran and Sharath, for allegedly distributing compromising images.

Revanna is currently in judicial custody for 14 days, with the Special Investigation Team (SIT) requesting a body warrant to keep him in custody until June 29 for the latest case. The SIT is actively investigating all four cases, questioning multiple individuals and gathering evidence.

The charges against Revanna include sections of the Indian Penal Code related to outraging a woman’s modesty, voyeurism, and rape. Additional charges under the Information Technology Act have been applied for violation of privacy. The case has significant political implications, as it involves a member of a prominent political family in Karnataka and has connections to other political figures.

The scandal has already had significant political fallout. Revanna has been suspended from the JD(S) party and was defeated in the Hassan constituency during the April 26 Lok Sabha elections. The involvement of a former BJP MLA in the latest FIR suggests potential cross-party ramifications.

As the SIT’s investigation continues to uncover new details and allegations, the case has drawn significant public attention and raised questions about the abuse of power by political figures. The ongoing probe may have far-reaching consequences for regional politics in Karnataka and potentially at the national level, underscoring the importance of addressing allegations of misconduct by public officials.

Written by Maria Therese Syriac.

 

PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.

 

1 2 3 … 1,943