Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Friday, 07 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-02-15 allowed

Ezajhussain Sabdarhussain & Anr vs State of Gujarat

Bench: 2 — Rastogi

In Brief

Two appellants (accused nos. 3 and 4) were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for their alleged role in the murder of Mohammad Shakil, a dispute that arose over water supply in a residential building. The prosecution case relied solely on the testimony of family members of the deceased, who claimed the appellants caught hold of the victim to facilitate the fatal stabbing by other accused. The Supreme Court held that common intention under Section 34 requires a prearranged plan, which must be proved from conduct, circumstances, or incriminating facts. The absence of independent corroborating evidence, no recovery of incriminating material, the presence of only interested witnesses, and no overt act beyond merely catching hold of the deceased rendered the conviction unsustainable. The appeal was allowed and the appellants were acquitted.

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

Criminal Law Section 34 IPC Common Intention Murder Ocular Evidence Witness Evidence

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