The Supreme Court on Tuesday acquitted a man who was convicted for a murder that was committed in 2006 [Suresh @ Uni @ Vadi Suresh v. State of Kerala]..A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta observed that conviction cannot be maintained only on the basis of identification of the accused four-and-a-half years after the incident.The Court noted that the eye-witness and the injured witness have specifically identified other accused and not the present appellant."It is further to be seen that apart from the identification parade not being held, the accused/present Appellant was shown to the witnesses by the Police. As such, we are of the considered view that conviction only on the basis of identification of the accused in the Court for the first time after four and half years of the incident would not be sufficient for maintaining the same," the Court observed..In 2006, the appellant and ten other accused persons had allegedly formed an unlawful assembly equipped with deadly weapons to murder a man and injure another. An eyewitness had registered a complaint against the accused.In 2008, the trial court convicted the accused under Sections 302 (murder), 307 (Attempt to murder), 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting with deadly weapon), 324 (hurt by dangerous weapons), 326 (grievous hurt by dangerous weapons), 427 (mischief) and 449 (house-trespass) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1958 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. They were sentenced to life imprisonment.The Kerala High Court later reduced the appellant's sentence of life imprisonment under Section 307 IPC read with Section 149 IPC. However, it upheld his sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC.Aggrieved by this decision, he moved the apex court..In its judgment, the Court took note of the iron rod which was used by the prosecution as evidence against the appellant. The rod, which had blood stains on it, was recovered two years after the incident. In this regard, the Court observed,"It is difficult to believe as to how the blood stains still remained on the said iron rod which was recovered from an open place after about 2 years and 2 months and when in the intervening period two monsoons had passed. As such, no credence could be given to the said recovery.".The Court also highlighted that there could be a possibility that the case against the appellant was one of mistaken identity.In the first charge-sheet, the appellant was described as ‘Unni’, whereas in the second charge-sheet, he was described as ‘Suresh alias Vadi Suresh’, the Court noted..Accordingly, the Court observed that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellant..Senior Advocate A Sirajudeen appeared for the appellant.Advocate Alim Anvar appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]
The Supreme Court on Tuesday acquitted a man who was convicted for a murder that was committed in 2006 [Suresh @ Uni @ Vadi Suresh v. State of Kerala]..A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta observed that conviction cannot be maintained only on the basis of identification of the accused four-and-a-half years after the incident.The Court noted that the eye-witness and the injured witness have specifically identified other accused and not the present appellant."It is further to be seen that apart from the identification parade not being held, the accused/present Appellant was shown to the witnesses by the Police. As such, we are of the considered view that conviction only on the basis of identification of the accused in the Court for the first time after four and half years of the incident would not be sufficient for maintaining the same," the Court observed..In 2006, the appellant and ten other accused persons had allegedly formed an unlawful assembly equipped with deadly weapons to murder a man and injure another. An eyewitness had registered a complaint against the accused.In 2008, the trial court convicted the accused under Sections 302 (murder), 307 (Attempt to murder), 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting with deadly weapon), 324 (hurt by dangerous weapons), 326 (grievous hurt by dangerous weapons), 427 (mischief) and 449 (house-trespass) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1958 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. They were sentenced to life imprisonment.The Kerala High Court later reduced the appellant's sentence of life imprisonment under Section 307 IPC read with Section 149 IPC. However, it upheld his sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC.Aggrieved by this decision, he moved the apex court..In its judgment, the Court took note of the iron rod which was used by the prosecution as evidence against the appellant. The rod, which had blood stains on it, was recovered two years after the incident. In this regard, the Court observed,"It is difficult to believe as to how the blood stains still remained on the said iron rod which was recovered from an open place after about 2 years and 2 months and when in the intervening period two monsoons had passed. As such, no credence could be given to the said recovery.".The Court also highlighted that there could be a possibility that the case against the appellant was one of mistaken identity.In the first charge-sheet, the appellant was described as ‘Unni’, whereas in the second charge-sheet, he was described as ‘Suresh alias Vadi Suresh’, the Court noted..Accordingly, the Court observed that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellant..Senior Advocate A Sirajudeen appeared for the appellant.Advocate Alim Anvar appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]
