Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Conspiracy Case Due to Lack of Evidence. The conviction was based on insufficient evidence and reliance on confessions of co-accused without corroboration.

In Favour of Accused
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal against a conviction for conspiracy and related offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act. The appellant, Parveen @ Sonu, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari, for his alleged role in a conspiracy to rescue other accused from police custody, which resulted in the death of Head Constable Arjun Singh. The incident occurred on 14.03.2009 when a police party was escorting four accused from Central Jail, Jaipur, to court. During the train journey, a group of young men attacked the police to facilitate the escape of the accused. The prosecution presented 23 witnesses, but the appellant contended that there was no concrete evidence linking him to the crime, and the conviction was based solely on confessions of co-accused, which lacked corroboration. The High Court dismissed the appeal, leading to the present appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found that the prosecution did not provide adequate evidence to establish the appellant's involvement in the conspiracy, noting the absence of independent witnesses and the failure to conduct a Test Identification Parade. The court emphasized that mere confessions without corroborative evidence are insufficient for conviction. Ultimately, the Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower courts, and ordered his immediate release unless required in connection with other cases.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Conspiracy - Requirement of Evidence - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 120-B - To establish conspiracy, there must be an agreement between parties for an unlawful act. The court found insufficient evidence to prove the appellant's involvement in the conspiracy, leading to the conclusion that the conviction was not safe to maintain. Held that the prosecution failed to establish the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 12-14).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the prosecution proved the appellant's involvement in the conspiracy and related offences.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant, and acquitted him of the charges.

Law Points

  • Conspiracy
  • Criminal Procedure
  • Evidence
  • IPC
  • Arms Act
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (SC) (12) 238

Crl.A.@SLP(Crl.)No.5438 of 2020

2021-12-07

R. Subhash Reddy, Hrishikesh Roy

Rishi Malhotra, Bansuri Swaraj

Parveen @ Sonu

The State of Haryana

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for conspiracy and related offences.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to overturn the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower courts.

Filing Reason

The appellant contended that there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction.

Previous Decisions

The conviction was upheld by the High Court, which dismissed the appeal.

Issues

Whether the prosecution proved the appellant's involvement in the conspiracy Whether the reliance on confessions of co-accused was sufficient for conviction

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that there was no concrete evidence linking him to the crime and that the conviction was based on confessions without corroboration. The respondent argued that there was sufficient evidence to establish the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that mere confessions of co-accused, without corroborative evidence, are insufficient to sustain a conviction for conspiracy under Section 120-B of the IPC.

Judgment Excerpts

The prosecution has failed to prove its case, that the appellant herein, has conspired with other accused for the offences for which he was charged. The findings recorded by the Trial Court in convicting the appellant mainly on the ground that he was one of the conspirators for the crime in question, is erroneous and illegal.

Procedural History

The appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari, and the conviction was upheld by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, leading to the present appeal in the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 224, 225, 332, 353, 302, 120-B
  • Arms Act: 25
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Grants Interim Directions in Securities Dispute Due to Urgency. Court Clarifies Payment Obligations and Leaves Jurisdictional Questions Open for Final Hearing.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows State's Appeal in Teacher Promotion Case — C&V Teachers Not Entitled to TGT Quota for Headmaster Post. Rule 9(5) of Haryana School Education (Group C) State Cadre Service Rules, 2012 only gives notional conversion to TGT cadre,...