In Brief
A person who owns a business was charged with murder and criminal conspiracy in connection with the custodial death of his accountant, based solely on the facts that he filed the initial robbery complaint involving the accountant and later brought the accountant to the police station during investigation. The Supreme Court held that at the discharge stage under Section 227 CrPC, courts can only consider prosecution materials, not defence case or suspicions unsupported by evidence. The Court found no agreement, conspiracy, or common plan disclosed in any prosecution documents or witness statements. It held that the appellant's conduct—reporting the robbery and lodging a custodial death complaint—was consistent with being the victim and informant, not a co-conspirator. The Court allowed the discharge application and criticised courts for basing rejection on unfounded suspicions rather than materials on record.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.