#Section 364 IPC

Allahabad High Court sets aside an appeal against acquittal under Section 364 IPC, ruling that family disputes require closer examination of witness credibility and adverse inferences for non-examination of key witnesses. The judgment reinforces that appellate courts must apply stricter evidentiary standards in cases involving familial relationships to prevent miscarriage of justice.

Allahabad HC sets aside conviction under Section 364 IPC, ruling that charges must specifically allege abduction or murder intent, and Section 313 CrPC questioning is mandatory. The court held that Section 302 and 364 IPC are not cognate offences, invalidating convictions where the charge was not explicitly framed.

Patna High Court sets aside conviction under Section 364 IPC, ruling that reliance solely on interested witnesses and the last seen theory-without forensic or independent evidence-fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment reinforces the need for corroborative evidence in circumstantial cases to prevent miscarriage of justice.

The Supreme Court has ruled that convicting an accused under Section 364 IPC without a formal charge, even when evidence supports abduction, breaches fair trial guarantees because the offence is not cognate to Section 302 IPC and cannot be subsumed under Section 222 CrPC. This sets a critical precedent for charge framing precision in criminal trials, protecting accused persons from prejudicial surprise convictions.