THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus RAMJAN KHAN & ORS.

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus RAMJAN KHAN & ORS.

Because the alleged oral dying declaration was not mentioned in the FIR or the Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement and the oral testimonies of the informant and eyewitnesses contained material omissions and contradictions going to the core of the prosecution case, the prosecution failed to prove the respondents' guilt beyond reasonable doubt; the High Court's acquittal was a reasonably possible view and is upheld.

Parties
Appellant: State of Madhya Pradesh; Respondents: Ramjan Khan & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal No. 2129 of 2014 / Appeal Against Acquittal From High Court Judgment in CRLA No. 602 of 1998 (challenge to Setting Aside of Convictions Under Section 302 IPC Read With Section 34 Ipc)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Dying Declaration, FIR, Appeal Against Acquittal, Benefit of Doubt, Eyewitness Testimony, Omissions and Contradictions, Postmortem/necroscopical Evidence
Criminal Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Dying Declaration FIR Appeal Against Acquittal Benefit of Doubt Eyewitness Testimony +2 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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Madhya Pradesh

Appellant

Ramjan Khan & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal No. 2129 of 2014 / Appeal Against Acquittal From High Court Judgment in CRLA No. 602 of 1998 (challenge to Setting Aside of Convictions Under Section 302 IPC Read With Section 34 Ipc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was right in setting aside the conviction of the respondents under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC
  2. 2 Reliability and admissibility of an oral dying declaration allegedly made to a close relative
  3. 3 Use of omissions in the FIR and Section 161 Cr.P.C. statements to impeach prosecution witnesses

Ratio Decidendi

Because the alleged oral dying declaration was not mentioned in the FIR or the Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement and the oral testimonies of the informant and eyewitnesses contained material omissions and contradictions going to the core of the prosecution case, the prosecution failed to prove the respondents' guilt beyond reasonable doubt; the High Court's acquittal was a reasonably possible view and is upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment of acquittal passed by the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1998 is upheld