Courts Supreme Court
Supreme Court restores acquittal in 1988 murder case
The case concerns a criminal appeal challenging a High Court order that remitted a 1988 murder case back to the Trial Court for re-consideration of evidence, specifically eyewitness testimony and recoveries under Section 27 of the Indian…
The case concerns a criminal appeal challenging a High Court order that remitted a 1988 murder case back to the Trial Court for re-consideration of evidence, specifically eyewitness testimony and recoveries under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The Supreme Court reviewed whether the acquittal of the accused should be restored based on the credibility of the prosecution's evidence.
Who it concerns: Appellants: Khalil Pasha & Ors. (Accused); Respondents: Abdul Rasheed & Anr. (Victim's side/Revision Petitioners); Bench: Justice K. Vinod Chandran.
What the court decided
- The Court granted leave to appeal.
- The Court observed that the question regarding whether a revision petition by a victim must be heard by a Division Bench or Single Bench is academic due to statutory changes.
- The Court noted that under the 2009 amendment to Section 372 Cr.P.C., victims have a statutory right to appeal against acquittals, which supersedes revision in such cases.
- The Court decided to consider the matter on a re-appreciation of the evidence led before the Trial Court.
- The Court analyzed the testimony of eyewitnesses (PW3, PW4, PW8) and doctors (PW1, PW11), noting inconsistencies regarding the deceased's consciousness and the scene of occurrence.
- The Court highlighted that the recoveries under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and chemical analysis reports were part of the prosecution's case but did not explicitly state the final order on the conviction/acquittal status in the provided text, though the title suggests the acquittal was restored.
Also in the document
- The incident alleged to have occurred on 14.02.1988.
- The accused had been under legal proceedings since 1988.
- The Court noted that the High Court's previous order remitting the case was passed without hearing the accused, violating Section 401(2) Cr.P.C.
- The Court found that the eyewitnesses were 'chance witnesses' with close acquaintances to the injured, which raised doubts about their testimony.
How this was written
An AI model running on our own computer read the government document and wrote this summary. No person has checked it.
⚠ Figures not confirmed. Our automated check could not find every number in this summary in the document. Treat the figures with care and check the original.
That check compares numbers only. It cannot confirm that the wording says what the document says — so the original document is always the authority.
This document is in our archive but is not shown on our front pages: a number in the summary could not be found in the document.
The original document
Supreme Court of India — orders & judgments
Court order · 28 Jul 2026
Read it here
Discussion
No one has discussed this document yet.