- Thread starter
- Staff
- #1
Dadparvar
Staff member
- Nov 11, 2016
- 10,597
- 0
- 6
The Supreme Court of India declined Monday to interfere in the Allahabad High Court ruling acquitting politician Ajay Mishra, who was charged with the murder of a student leader in 2000. Mishra is a Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs in the Government of India and is a member of the ruling Bharatiya Janta Party.
The court, in a short order, held, “Having heard the learned Senior counsel – Mr. Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioner at length and after carefully perusing the material placed on record, we are not inclined to interfere with the concurrent findings of facts recorded by the two Courts.” Consequently, the special leave petition against the Allahabad High Court order was rejected, and any pending applications were considered disposed of. A Special Leave Petition (SLP) is a plea made to a Supreme Court seeking permission to appeal a decision from a lower court. It is a discretionary remedy, and the higher court decides whether to grant permission for the appeal. It has been provided under the Article 136 of the Indian Constitution.
The appeal in the Supreme Court was filed against orders of the Allahabad High Court passed in May 2019. In a criminal appeal and revision, the state had challenged in the High Court the acquittal of four accused individuals, including Ajay Mishra, in a murder case of Prabhat Gupta. The trial court had acquitted the accused, expressing doubts about the credibility of the prosecution’s case. The trial court judge, after scrutinizing the evidence, had acquitted the accused of the charges under Section 302, murder, read with Section 34, common intention, of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court is the first court to hear any criminal matter.
The state had argued that the trial court’s judgment was flawed, emphasizing the broad daylight murder witnessed by credible eyewitnesses. The state had contended that the acquittal was against the weight of evidence. However, the court noted discrepancies in the statements of eyewitnesses and questioned the delay in recording their statements. The court had observed inconsistencies in the prosecution’s narrative, particularly regarding a purported protest and the presence of witnesses at the crime scene. Critical analysis had revealed doubts about the presence of witnesses at the crime scene, and the court had questioned the credibility of their statements. The court had noted discrepancies in the site plan, forensic evidence, and the medical report, raising further doubts about the prosecution’s case.
The court eventually concluded that the trial court rightly disbelieved the prosecution’s story, finding it untrustworthy. Emphasizing the principle that suspicion cannot replace proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the court dismissed the appeal and revision, upholding the acquittal of the accused. Additionally, the court deemed the trial court judge’s judgment and order of acquittal to be plausible, given the trial court’s advantage of assessing witness demeanor. The appeal and revision had been dismissed, and the acquittal had stood upheld.
Mishra is an Indian politician and Member of Parliament in the 17th Lok Sabha, the lower house of the Parliament. Mishra has served in various legislative and parliamentary roles, including as a Member of the Legislative Assembly for the State of Uttar Pradesh and a Member of Parliament from Lok Sabha. However, he has been accused of multiple crimes and has also faced criminal charges in various cases. He became Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs on July 7, 2021.
The post India Supreme Court declines to interfere in acquittal of politician charged with murder appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.
The court, in a short order, held, “Having heard the learned Senior counsel – Mr. Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioner at length and after carefully perusing the material placed on record, we are not inclined to interfere with the concurrent findings of facts recorded by the two Courts.” Consequently, the special leave petition against the Allahabad High Court order was rejected, and any pending applications were considered disposed of. A Special Leave Petition (SLP) is a plea made to a Supreme Court seeking permission to appeal a decision from a lower court. It is a discretionary remedy, and the higher court decides whether to grant permission for the appeal. It has been provided under the Article 136 of the Indian Constitution.
The appeal in the Supreme Court was filed against orders of the Allahabad High Court passed in May 2019. In a criminal appeal and revision, the state had challenged in the High Court the acquittal of four accused individuals, including Ajay Mishra, in a murder case of Prabhat Gupta. The trial court had acquitted the accused, expressing doubts about the credibility of the prosecution’s case. The trial court judge, after scrutinizing the evidence, had acquitted the accused of the charges under Section 302, murder, read with Section 34, common intention, of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court is the first court to hear any criminal matter.
The state had argued that the trial court’s judgment was flawed, emphasizing the broad daylight murder witnessed by credible eyewitnesses. The state had contended that the acquittal was against the weight of evidence. However, the court noted discrepancies in the statements of eyewitnesses and questioned the delay in recording their statements. The court had observed inconsistencies in the prosecution’s narrative, particularly regarding a purported protest and the presence of witnesses at the crime scene. Critical analysis had revealed doubts about the presence of witnesses at the crime scene, and the court had questioned the credibility of their statements. The court had noted discrepancies in the site plan, forensic evidence, and the medical report, raising further doubts about the prosecution’s case.
The court eventually concluded that the trial court rightly disbelieved the prosecution’s story, finding it untrustworthy. Emphasizing the principle that suspicion cannot replace proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the court dismissed the appeal and revision, upholding the acquittal of the accused. Additionally, the court deemed the trial court judge’s judgment and order of acquittal to be plausible, given the trial court’s advantage of assessing witness demeanor. The appeal and revision had been dismissed, and the acquittal had stood upheld.
Mishra is an Indian politician and Member of Parliament in the 17th Lok Sabha, the lower house of the Parliament. Mishra has served in various legislative and parliamentary roles, including as a Member of the Legislative Assembly for the State of Uttar Pradesh and a Member of Parliament from Lok Sabha. However, he has been accused of multiple crimes and has also faced criminal charges in various cases. He became Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs on July 7, 2021.
The post India Supreme Court declines to interfere in acquittal of politician charged with murder appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.