Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Saturday, 08 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-10-24 partly_allowed

Asar Mohammad and Ors vs State of U.P

Bench: 2 — A.M. Khanwilkar

In Brief

Three appellants were convicted of murdering Zahida Begum and her son Ishlam, whose bodies were found in a septic tank at their house. Appellant 1 confessed and led police to the bodies. The High Court affirmed convictions for murder and destruction of evidence. The Supreme Court held that Appellant 1's conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence and confession was sound. However, Appellants 2 and 3 could not be convicted for murder solely on the co-accused's confession without independent substantive evidence. The Court acquitted them of murder but upheld their conviction under Section 201 IPC (destruction of evidence) based on their knowledge of the crime, failure to report it, and failure to explain their conduct.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Law Evidence Circumstantial Evidence Murder Destruction of Evidence Circumstantial Evidence Test Co-accused Confession

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login