Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
In criminal jurisprudence, the standard of proof required to sustain a conviction is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is significantly higher than the preponderance of probabilities applicable in civil cases.
“The motive for the commission of the offence was absent and the same was very relevant as the case was based on circumstantial evidence.”
Key rulings and landmark decisions from February 2025 shaping the legal landscape.
The Court found that circumstances in the instant case constituted more than a prima facie case to enable the prosecution to invoke Section 106 of the Evidence Act and shift the burden on the accused husband to explain what had happened on the day & date his wife died.
In the instant case a husband was charged for the murder of his wife who died in mysterious circumstances by the Trial Court; however, MP High Court acquitted the husband as it found the child witness to be tutored.
The Court found that circumstances in the case constitute more than a prima facie case to enable the prosecution to invoke Section 106 of the Evidence Act and shift the burden on the accused husband to explain what had happened on the day & date his wife died.
“When one of the three circumstances was disbelieved and discarded by the High Court, then the chain of circumstantial evidence could not have been held to be complete and proved and on that basis to hold the accused guilty of the offence.”
Failure to abide by Section 275(4) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 alone would be sufficient to suffocate the case of the prosecution, since the same is not an inconsequential irregularity, rather it impacts the entire prosecution.
“If the age of wife is not below the age of 15 years then any sexual intercourse or sexual act by the husband with her wife cannot be termed as rape under the circumstances, as such absence of consent of wife for unnatural act loses its importance, therefore, the offence under Section 376 and 377 of the IPC against the accused was not made out.”
Top criminal cases on quashing of proceedings, arrest, bail, acquittal, and more.
“The evidence of a child witness can easily be influenced by the elders in the family. Acceptance of the child witness evidence would be dangerous in the present circumstances of the case as the evidence appears to be a result of tutoring. Not examining the father and grandfather of the victim, who were sleeping by the side of the victim girl is fatal to the prosecution case”.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Top criminal cases on quashing of proceedings, arrest, bail, acquittal, and more.
“The medical evidence on record does not support the allegation made by prosecutrix and there is no other corroboration of the version of the victim.”
“The prime object of FIR, from the point of view of the informant is to set the criminal law in motion and from the point of the investigating authorities is to obtain information about the alleged activity to enable them to take suitable steps to trace and book the guilty. FIR is an important document, though not a substantial piece of evidence, and may be put in evidence to support or contradict the evidence of its maker viz., the informant.”
The accused was arrested in 2012 on the suspicion of murdering his wife, mother and 2-year-old daughter. In 2016, the Trial Court convicted him and imposed death penalty which was confirmed by Bombay High Court
Brij Bihari Prasad, a member of the Bihar Legislative Assembly was murdered in 1998. The High Court reversed the Trial Court’s decision and acquitted the accused persons.
The Court emphasised that in order to reverse a finding of acquittal, a higher threshold is required. The presumption of innocence operating in favour of an accused throughout the trial gets concretized with a finding of acquittal by the Trial Court.
“Madras High Court said that, in the instant case, the prosecution has not been able to establish that there indeed was a crime. In fact, there is an abuse of judicial process when the victim set a criminal law in motion, perhaps with a false FIR”
Apart from the right to get Exit Permit, the Chinese woman needs to be adequately compensated for the mental agony, trauma, and sufferings undergone by her due to the conduct of Respondent 2, Union of India. Thus, Respondent 2 is directed to pay an amount of Rs 10,00,000 as compensation.