Legal provisions involved: Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 164 CrPC, Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

Judgement by: Supreme Court of India

Judge/Bench: Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran

Facts

A man was accused of killing his friend. The trial court said there was not enough proper evidence and acquitted him. The Meghalaya High Court later reversed this and convicted him, mainly relying on his confessional statements and surrounding circumstances. The man then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Key legal provisions

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 164 CrPC

Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

Issues raised

Can someone be convicted mainly on confession? Was the evidence strong enough? Was the High Court right to overturn the acquittal?

Arguments of the case

The prosecution said the confession and other facts proved guilt. The defence said the confession was doubtful and there was no solid supporting evidence.

Judgement

The Supreme Court said confession alone is not enough unless it is voluntary and supported by other proof. Since the evidence was weak and uncorroborated, the court set aside the conviction and restored the acquittal.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.