In this case, deceased allegedly assaulted to death by two appellant-accused herein, father and son, using “tabal” and “axe”. Land dispute between appellants (Appellants 1 and 2) and deceased, was alleged cause of the incident. The High Court upheld conviction of appellants under S. 302 IPC. However, prosecution failed to established case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, on account of infirmities, accused was given benefit of doubt and conviction of both accused reversed.
Case Comment-
- There was a dispute between accused- appellants regarding the land dispute that indicates the motive of the crime
- The deceased son and nephew didn’t attempt to save the deceased or provide medical aid but rushed to lodge FIR which was an unnatural act.
- The FIR filed by the deceased son was suspected due to interpolation and ante timing and casted doubt on its authenticity.
- There was no credible independent eyewitness except Tahir, but he was not examined.
- The contradictory statements given by the witnesses
- Failure to produce the belongings of the accused-appellants creates doubt about the connection between the accused and the prosecution’s case
- Sudden death of the doctor who did post mortem of the deceased
[Mohd. Muslim v. State of U.P., (2023) 7 SCC 350]