In Brief
Subramanya was convicted by the High Court of Karnataka for the murder of Kamalamma in 2010, reversing the trial court's acquittal. The Supreme Court set aside the conviction, holding that the High Court erred in relying on weak circumstantial evidence to overturn the acquittal. The Court found that the extra-judicial confession (made four months after the alleged crime) lacked credibility; the discovery of the weapon, clothes, and body failed to meet Section 27 of the Evidence Act requirements due to missing proper documentation of the accused's exact statements; and motive alone cannot substitute for concrete proof. With the chain of circumstantial evidence broken, the Court applied the well-established principle that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed and the appellant was set at liberty.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.