LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/chandan-vs-the-state-delhi-admn-20240405/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Chandan vs The State (Delhi Admn.)

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
5 April 2024
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No.788 of 2012
Result
Dismissed
Bench
Sudhanshu Dhulia, Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale
Citation
[2024] 4 S.C.R. 94 : 2024 INSC 271
Acts & Sections
IPC
Supreme Court Reports [2024] 4 S.C.R. 94 : 2024 INSC 271
Issue for consideration
Matter pertains to effect of lack or absence of motive, when there is testimony of a reliable eye-witness.
Headnote

Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 – Murder – Prosecution case that accused stabbed the victim multiple times with the knife he was carrying, resulting in the death of the victim – Victim’s sister-in-law witnessed the incident from a short distance – Conviction and sentence u/s. 302 by the courts below – Interference with:

Held: Not called for – Blood of the deceased clearly matched with the blood found on the knife recovered from the accused, together with the ocular evidence of a reliable eye-witness of the incident – Murder, the arrest of the accused and the recovery of the knife from him happened in quick succession, with a very little time gap – Entire evidence put together by the prosecution establishes the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt – Submission that the prosecution not been able to establish any motive on the accused for committing this dastardly act is true, but since in the instant case there is nothing to discredit the eye-witness, the motive itself is of little relevance – Lack or absence of motive is inconsequential when direct evidence establishes the crime. [Paras 4-6]

Keywords: Lack of or absence of motive · Testimony of a reliable eye-witness · Murder · Ocular evidence · Recovery of knife

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. 1. The appellant before this Court was convicted under Section 302 of IPC. The conviction and sentence have been upheld by the High Court in appeal. As per the prosecution it is a case of a daylight murder with a reliable eye-witness. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 28.05.1993 at about 8:15 pm while PW-2, who was sister-in-law of the deceased was returning from Ram Bazar, the deceased and the accused were walking a few steps ahead of her. After a few minutes she saw the two, i.e. the deceased Rakesh and Chandan, grappling with each other and then she saw
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →