NDLI: Asar Mohammad and Ors. Vs. The State of U.p.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Penal Code 1860:
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Penal Code, 1860:ss. 302 and 201 – Murder – Circumstantial evidence –Prosecution of three accused – Confessional statement of oneaccused (appellant No.1) – Recovery of dead bodies at his instance– FIR lodged on the basis of missing report filed by PW7 – Convictionby trial court awarding death sentence to all the three accused –High Court affirmed the conviction, but reduced the death sentenceto imprisonment for life – On appeal, held: In view of the entireevidence and totality of the proved circumstances, courts below wereright in holding appellant No.1 guilty of the offences u/ss. 302 and201 – Except the confession of appellant No.1 there is no otherindependent substantive evidence to show involvement of other twoaccused (Appellant Nos.2 and 3) for having caused murder – It isnot permissible to proceed against them solely on the confessionalstatement – Therefore, appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are acquitted of theoffence punishable u/s. 302 – However, from the provedcircumstantials it is apparent that they had the knowledge of themurder and whereabout of the dead bodies and despite that theydid not disclose the same with an intention to screen appellant No.1– Therefore, they are liable to be convicted for offence punishableu/s.201 – Evidence Act, 1872 - s.27.Evidence Act, 1872:s.27 – Scope of – The word ‘fact’ as contemplated in s. 27 isnot limited to ‘actual physical material object’ - It includes discoveryof an object, the place from which it is produced and the knowledgeof the accused as to its existence.Evidence:Confession – Of co-accused – If can be used against otherco-accused – Held: Confession of co-accused by itself cannot be the basis to proceed against the other accused unless somethingmore is produced to indicate their involvement in the commission ofcrime.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar
Neutral Citation	2018 INSC 985
Petitioner	Asar Mohammad And Ors.
Respondent	The State Of U.p.
SCR	[2018] 13 S.C.R. 248
Judgement Date	2018-10-24
Case Number	1617

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Asar Mohammad and Ors. Vs. The State of U.p.

Please Log-in to view this content

Sahdeo and Ors Vs. State of U.p.

State of U.p. Vs. Kishan

Ramvir & Ors. Vs. State of U.p.

State of U.p. Vs. Jagram & Ors.

Siyaram and Ors. Vs. State of M.p

Sandeep Vs. State of U.p.

Ram Tahal & Ors. Vs. State of U.p.

Ramachandran & Ors. Etc. Vs. State of Kerala

State of Punjab Vs. Gurpreet Singh & Ors.

Asar Mohammad and Ors. Vs. The State of U.p.

Asar Mohammad and Ors. Vs. The State of U.p.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Sahdeo and Ors Vs. State of U.p.

State of U.p. Vs. Kishan

Ramvir & Ors. Vs. State of U.p.

State of U.p. Vs. Jagram & Ors.

Siyaram and Ors. Vs. State of M.p

Sandeep Vs. State of U.p.

Ram Tahal & Ors. Vs. State of U.p.

Ramachandran & Ors. Etc. Vs. State of Kerala

State of Punjab Vs. Gurpreet Singh & Ors.

Asar Mohammad and Ors. Vs. The State of U.p.