A conviction cannot stand where the prosecution fails to adduce legally acceptable evidence implicating the accused.

The prosecution alleged that on 3 November 2013, the appellant quarrelled with his father and stabbed him in the chest with scissors, causing his death.

The appellant was charged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC); the trial court convicted him under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced him to three years’ simple imprisonment and a fine of ₹10,000.

On appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the material witnesses had not supported the prosecution.

Whether the prosecution had adduced legally acceptable evidence sufficient to sustain the appellant’s conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC

Whether the trial court’s conviction could stand when the material witnesses did not support the prosecution case

The court considered the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC and the sufficiency of the prosecution evidence to sustain a criminal conviction.

It relied on no cited precedent and stated no further legal test; its decision turned on whether the evidence on record substantiated the prosecution case.

The court noted that the complainant, the alleged eyewitness, and witnesses to the relevant mahazars and inquest did not support the prosecution case; the complainant also denied the contents of her complaint, and the alleged eyewitness denied her prior statement.

Although witnesses were treated as hostile, the prosecution elicited no answers sufficient to substantiate its case.

The court therefore found that the prosecution had failed to place legally acceptable evidence supporting the conviction, making the trial court’s decision unsustainable.

It directed the trial court to refund any bail amount deposited and ordered that the appellant’s bail bond stand cancelled.