TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Abetment Case</h1> <h3>STATE OF HARYANA Versus JASVINDER SINGH</h3> STATE OF HARYANA Versus JASVINDER SINGH - 2000 (9) SCC 387, 2000 (9) JT 163 Issues:Appeal against acquittal under Section 498A, I.P.C. and conviction under Section 306 I.P.C.Analysis:The case involved an appeal by the State of Haryana against an order of acquittal by the High Court interfering with the conviction of the respondents under Section 498A, I.P.C. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was subjected to cruel treatment and harassment by the accused, leading to her suicide. The trial judge acquitted the accused of abetment to suicide under Section 306 I.P.C. but convicted them under Section 498A I.P.C. based on testimonies of witnesses. The High Court upheld the acquittal under Section 306 I.P.C., finding insufficient evidence of instigation or abetment. Regarding the conviction under Section 498A, the High Court questioned the reliability of witnesses, particularly PW-9, due to material omissions in their statements. The High Court dismissed the testimonies of PWs. 10 and 11, citing their close relation to the deceased and lack of corroborative evidence.The State contended that the High Court's evaluation of evidence was perfunctory, challenging the acquittal. However, the Supreme Court found no justification for interference with the acquittal under Section 306 I.P.C. as both trial and High Court judges had thoroughly examined the evidence and found it insufficient to establish abetment to suicide. Concerning the acquittal under Section 498A I.P.C., the Supreme Court noted the High Court's scrutiny of witness testimonies, especially PW-9, and agreed with the decision not to rely on their statements due to material omissions. The Court also highlighted the dismissal of testimonies of PWs. 10 and 11 by the High Court based on lack of corroborative evidence and scrappy discussion. Despite the State's request for an adjournment to present evidence, the Supreme Court declined, affirming the High Court's order of acquittal due to the absence of contrary materials before them.In conclusion, the Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's order of acquittal under both Section 306 and 498A I.P.C. The Court dismissed the appeal by the State of Haryana, emphasizing the importance of presenting sufficient evidence and the need for diligent prosecution in such cases.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
