In Brief
Chunthuram was convicted of murder based partly on an identification parade where the prosecution claimed three items were available but the witness was shown only one for identification. The Supreme Court found critical flaws in the identification procedure, rendering that evidence unreliable. The court also questioned the reliability of the eye-witness testimony. Applying the established principle that when evidence can point either to guilt or innocence, the accused's favour should prevail, the Court set aside the conviction and allowed the appeal.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.