RAJU @ RAJENDRA PRASAD versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

RAJU @ RAJENDRA PRASAD versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

The conviction under Section 302/34 IPC could not be sustained because the prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence that did not establish the required complete chain of events; there was no evidence the appellants were last seen with the deceased and the star witness did not witness any violence, therefore the circumstantial case did not exclude every hypothesis of innocence and the convictions were quashed and appellants acquitted.

Parties
Appellant: Raju @ Rajendra Prasad; Appellant: Suman Devi; Respondent: State of Rajasthan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed; convictions quashed and appellants acquitted
Legal Topics
Circumstantial Evidence, Murder, Acquittal, Conviction, Section 302 IPC, Section 34 IPC
Criminal Law Evidence Penal Code Circumstantial Evidence Murder Acquittal Conviction Section 302 IPC +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raju @ Rajendra Prasad

Appellant

Suman Devi

Appellant

State of Rajasthan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether conviction under Section 302/34 IPC can be sustained on the circumstantial evidence on record
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved that the appellants were last seen with the deceased and established a complete chain of circumstances pointing only to their guilt
  3. 3 Whether the evidence including testimony of PW-6 and medical evidence was sufficient to exclude every hypothesis of the appellants' innocence

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction under Section 302/34 IPC could not be sustained because the prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence that did not establish the required complete chain of events; there was no evidence the appellants were last seen with the deceased and the star witness did not witness any violence, therefore the circumstantial case did not exclude every hypothesis of innocence and the convictions were quashed and appellants acquitted.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; convictions quashed and appellants acquitted

Orders

  • Judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court and the High Court under Section 302/34 IPC quashed and set aside
  • Accused acquitted for the offence for which they were convicted