Supreme Court finds no homicidal death in friend's drowning case

The core issue is whether the evidence supports a finding of homicidal death or if the death was an accidental drowning, as argued by the appellants.

Who it concerns: Appellants: Taher Vajiyuddin Rangwala & Anr.; Respondent: The State of Gujarat; Bench: Justice K. Vinod Chandran.

What the court decided

• The Court examined the post-mortem report and medical testimony, finding no evidence of homicidal death and noting that medical evidence favored the defense version of accidental drowning.
• The Court noted that the alleged motive was an afterthought and that the FIR was registered with a delay of approximately four months.
• The Court observed that the testimony of shopkeepers regarding soda bottles did not incriminate the accused of murder, and that the scene was not isolated, making premeditated murder unlikely.
• The Court rejected the reliance on the accused's silence and conduct (such as lying about dropping the victim) as incriminating, given the defense of accidental drowning and panic.

Also in the document

• The judgment is marked as 'Non-Reportable'.
• The Court noted that the High Court had not considered the testimony of the Investigating Officer, rendering it inconsequential.
• The Court found that no broken soda bottle with blood stains was sent for forensic examination, despite prosecution arguments to the contrary.