Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Saturday, 08 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-01-25 allowed

SURAJ PAL vs THE STATE OF HARYANA

Bench: 2 — R. Banumathi, R. Subhash Reddy

In Brief

This case involved an appeal against conviction for mobile phone snatching under Section 379-A IPC. The appellant was convicted based on the victim's in-court identification without a Test Identification Parade, despite a six-month gap between the incident and identification. The Supreme Court found the conviction unreliable because the victim saw the accused for only seconds during evening snatching, no proper identification procedure was followed, and the recovered phone was traced through the co-accused's disclosure. The Court held that sufficient doubt existed and acquitted the appellant, emphasizing that the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt had not been discharged.

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

Criminal Procedure Evidence Identification Parade Testimony Burden of Proof

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