Bir Bahadur v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
In a revision petition challenging convictions for theft under Section 379 IPC read with Section 34, the Supreme Court acquitted the appellants. The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case as the testimony of the accomplice witness was uncorroborated and founded on inadmissible disclosure statements. Relying on Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, the Court ruled that since the crime scene and facts were already known to the police prior to the accused's disclosure, the accused's statements could not lead to a 'discovery' of facts rendering such evidence inadmissible. Consequently, the High Court's revisions were allowed, and the fine imposed was directed to be refunded.
What did the court decide?
The revisions are allowed. The appellants are acquitted of offences punishable under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The fine amount imposed is to be refunded to them.