Supreme Court of India
Rukia Begum v. State of Karnataka
INSC stands for INDIAN SUPREME COURT. A neutral citation scheme assigned by the Court itself, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter. INSC is the neutral citation scheme assigned by the Supreme Court, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter.
3 Supreme Court benches have cited this judgment.
What the Court ordered
We are of the opinion that the circumstantial D evidence brought against these appellants are not such which lead towards their guilt.
Judgment, page 10
From the headnote
Penal Code, 1860: s.302, 201 r.w. s.34 - Murder and causing disappearance of evidence - Strained relations between the victims and the accused party - Assault on the victims resulting in their death - Trial court acquitted 'R' and 'N' and two other accused holding that circumstances did not point guilt towards them - However convicted '/' and 'M' holding that the circumstantial evidence i.e. motive, presence of blood, recoveries and abscondence immediately after the occurrence pointed towards their guilt - High Court set aside the acquittal of appellants 'R' and 'N' and also upheld the
Where later benches applied it
- 2013 State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dal Singh & Ors.
- 2012 Arvindkumar Anupalal Poddar v. State of Maharashtra
- 2013 Bakhshish Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Of those, 2 relied on · 1 distinguished
Sign in free to read it
- The full judgment, page by page, as published in the Supreme Court Reports
- The ratio: what the Court held, verbatim, with the page it sits on
- Every bench that relied on it, and every bench that argued against it
- Search every reported judgment, by party, citation or question
- Download the PDF, copy pinpoint citations ready for a filing
An email address, no password.