LAW FOR ALL

Last seen theory - not established - 6 days gap not explained properly - prosecution failed to explain about the presence of deceased at police station when deceased aunt visited the police station - the last seen theory lost it's sanctity - when some of the accused are acquitted , the same benefit doubt applies to the accused also as the case was found on last seen theory - Apex court held that n the present case as noticed above, the Sessions Judge convicted the accused Nos.1 to 3 on the basis of last seen evidence, the correctness of last seen version emanating from Valarmathi (PW-1), Amirthavalli (PW-3) and Murugan (PW-4) and as per the prosecution case is also doubtful, there being contradiction about place where the accused were last seen with the deceased Manikandan. The High Court had failed to appreciate the aforesaid fact and erred in affirming the order of conviction passed by the Sessions Judge. For the reasons aforesaid, we set aside the impugned judgment dated 31st March, 2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No.1009 of 2005 and impugned order of conviction and sentence dated 17th November, 2005 passed by the Sessions Judge in Session Case No.61 of 2005. The appeal is allowed. = KRISHNAN @ RAMASAMY & ORS. … APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF TAMIL NADU … RESPONDENT = 2014 - July Part - http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41717