Criminal Trial – Parameters, in which interference can be made in a judgment of acquittal – Testimony of an Approver – Corroboration – Burden of proof – Delay in reporting to police – Murder case – Common intention and Common object explained – Hostile witness . [2011 PLRonline 0204 SC]

An appellate court can intervene in a judgment of acquittal only if there are “compelling and substantial reasons,” such as perversity in the original judgment, for doing so. The court has the authority to re-appreciate the evidence and arrive at its own conclusions.
Under Sections 306, 307, and 308 of the Criminal Procedure Code, an accused person can seek a pardon at any time after case commitment but before judgment, with the condition of full disclosure of facts related to the offence.
Common intention and common object, as defined by Sections 34 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, are distinct. Common intention requires a pre-arranged plan, while common object does not.
The burden of proving common intention lies on the prosecution and can be inferred from proved facts and circumstances. Mere presence among assailants can suffice if a common intention exists.
For an approver's testimony to be reliable, it generally needs to be corroborated in material particulars. corroboration can come from other witnesses or even circumstantial evidence.
Unreliable testimony from an approver cannot serve as the foundation for a conviction, even if attempts are made to corroborate it.
Delays in reporting to the police in a murder case were deemed acceptable if the priority was medical treatment for the injured, as was the case with Approver Dey.
Testimony from hostile witnesses can still be admissible if corroborated, with the court emphasizing the quality of the testimony over the quantity.
In cases involving multiple assailants, it's natural for witnesses to not recognize or remember all individuals involved. Courts must carefully verify such witness accounts.
Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows for tendering a pardon to an accomplice to ensure that heinous crimes committed by multiple people can be adequately prosecuted, given the accomplice's full and true disclosure.

Source: Full Judgment with detailed headnotes for Online Subscribers (opens automatically) (Click to subscribe Trial Pack)

Tags: Acquittal approver Common Intention Common object Corroboration Criminal Jurisprudence Criminal Trial Criminal Trial - Acquittal CrPC S. 306 CrPC S. 307 CrPC S. 308 Dying Declaration Evidence Evidence - Burden of Proof Evidence Act S. 154 Expert IPC S. 302 IPC S. 34 IPC S. 349 Justice H.L. Gokhale Justice P. Sathasivam mrinal das

IPC S. 34 – Common Intention – Can be formed even in the course of the incident – Would come into play where participation of the accused in a crime is proved and the common intention is also established. [PLRonline 482604]

Consumer Protection Act – Stocks and shares – Invesment in – Complainant is not a Consumer – It is not the case of the Complainant that he had invested the money in share market exclusively for earning his livelihood. [2022 PLRonline 0596 (NCDRC)]

NIA S. 138 – Liability of Joint Account Holders – There is no provision for taking cognizance against a person other than the “drawer” of the cheque. [(2023-4)212 PLR 177]

Court proceedings – Videography – Whether would amount to criminal contempt of court ? [(2023-4)212 PLR 163]

Court proceedings – Videography – Court proceedings in the High Court or any other Court subordinate thereto cannot be videotaped, photographed or telecast without taking prior written permission from the High Court. [PLRonline]

NDPS S. 2 (viia) read with the notification S.O. No. 1055 (E) dated 19/10/2001 , Section 37, 52A – “commercial quantity” – Weight Adjustment due to Drying – Weight recorded during inventory before the Magistrate considered – Bail Consideration for Multiple Accused. [PLRonline 413680]

[SC] CPC O. 7 R. 11 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 7 Rule 11 – Assessment of Plaints – Court should not engage in assessing the correctness or merits of the plaint’s averments – Court made an error by partially rejecting the plaint . [PLRonline 416680]

[SC] Insurance – Surveyor’s report – Not relied – Reliance by surveyor on forensic report – Claim payable.

[SC] Insurance – Surveyor’s report, though important, is not absolute and not binding on the parties – It is not that sacrosanct that it cannot be departed from; it is not conclusive. [ PLRonline 368351]

IT Act S. 67(A) – Posted on Instagram 4-5 pictures of petitioner kissing the complainant on her cheek – Bail granted. [2022 PLRonline 0595]

Related Posts

IPC S. 34 – Common Intention – Can be formed even in the course of the incident – Would come into play where participation of the accused in a crime is proved and the common intention is also established. [PLRonline 482604]

NIA S. 138 – Liability of Joint Account Holders – There is no provision for taking cognizance against a person other than the “drawer” of the cheque. [(2023-4)212 PLR 177]

Welcome Back!

Create New Account!

Retrieve your password

Save PLRonline.in APP!