Bombay HC Sets Aside Trial Court Decision Due to Lack of Cogent Evidence

Must Read

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Follow us

In the case of Ramesh Namdeo Naikwade v. the State of Maharashtra, a division bench of Justice S.S. Shinde and Justice M.S. Karnik of the Bombay High Court held that no basis for conviction is formed on the mere existing suspicion against the accused.

Facts of the Case

The accused in this case preferred an appeal from the trial court after being charged and found guilty under section 302 of IPC guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment with Rs. 1000 fine. The accused was found guilty of murdering the deceased Dagu on 16th May 2013. 

It is the case of the prosecution that on 13th May, the accused, along with two others (A1 & A2), took the deceased to a school area where they beat him to death. The family found the body of the deceased on the next day. After this, the investigation officer collected several pieces of evidence including blood-stained sand, a panchnama, statements of eyewitnesses etc. 

The trial court acquitted the two people i.e. A1 and A2 but convicted the accused. The prosecution supported the findings of the trial court whereas the respondent argued that the evidence was not properly analysed. 

Court’s Observations

The court analysed the evidence based on which the accused was held guilty by the trial court:

  1. PW1: The statement of the wife of the deceased looked weak on the premise that in the cross-examination she said that she was told by Kiran (nephew of the deceased) that the deceased was being taken by the appellant, but the same was not mentioned in her written statement, and no reason was assigned by her for the same. Moreover, she didn’t inform the police or the panchayat on the day of the incident or the next day when they found the body.
  2. PW2: He deposed that the appellant was physically challenged. He informed Kiran that the deceased was being taken by the appellant.
  3. PW3: Balu was considered as an eyewitness in the present case. The strange fact here was that when he reached the spot, he deposed that he saw the deceased being beaten up by the appellant and others, but he didn’t react to it nor did the appellant do anything to him even though both of them were nearby.
  4. PW4: The witness stated that he heard the noise of quarrel but didn’t go there as it was dark. He informed PW 3 about the incident. It is interesting to note here that PW3 deposed that he was told by PW4 that the deceased was being beaten up but PW 4 stated in his statement that since it was dark, he didn’t notice anyone. 

The court observed that the statements were more of a false implication on the appellant as the father of PW 3 lost the gram panchayat elections to the appellant. It looks more like a politically motivated implication. Look at the other pieces of evidence now:

  1. PW8: The doctor who conducted the post-mortem stated that the injuries sustained by the deceased could only have taken place if some weapon was involved.  The prosecution’s case was not that the weapon was used by the appellant. The prosecution also never found a murder weapon. Therefore, the injuries on the deceased cannot be attributed to the appellant. 
  2. The eyewitness statement is also unreliable. Hence, the conviction of the appellant only based on blood-stained clothes cannot remain.
  3. As held by the Apex Court in Bhajan Singh v. the State of Punjab, a conviction cannot take place only based on great suspicion.

Court’s Decision

The Court set aside the conviction of the accused and directed him to deposit a surety of Rs. 15000 as per section 437A of the CrPC.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Women Advocates Move To Supreme Court Against the Delhi HC Orders on Resuming Physical Hearing

Another writ petition has been filed by women advocates in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Delhi HC of directing the expansion of physical hearing of cases within the National Capital Territory of Delhi without giving an option to litigants to be represented by their lawyers virtually.

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -