Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Monday, 03 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2021-03-22 partly_allowed

RAMESH ALIAS DAPINDER SINGH vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Bench: 2 — Uday Umesh Lalit, K.M. Joseph

In Brief

The appellant, originally accused No. 3, was tried for murder and other offences under IPC Sections 302, 323, and 324 with Section 34 (common intention). The trial court convicted all three accused, and the High Court upheld the conviction. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the Court held that mere presence with principal offenders does not establish vicarious liability under Section 34 without specific overt acts. The eyewitness testimony attributed no specific act to the appellant concerning the victim's assault. The Court acquitted the appellant of murder (Section 302) and Section 324 charges, but affirmed conviction under Section 323, granting him the benefit of doubt on the more serious charges."

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

Criminal Law Indian Penal Code Vicarious Liability Section 34 Common Intention Murder Benefit of Doubt 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