Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: (2006) 12 SCC 512
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2006-0027MaharashtraJudgment 19 October 2006
State Reserve Police personnel vs State of Maharashtra
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of [name withheld], an employee of the State Reserve Police, against his concurrent conviction under Section 302 IPC for the murder of a Maharashtra woman on 3 September 1988. The Court credited the last-seen evidence of PWs 1, 3 and 4, corroborated by medical evidence, and held absence of proved motive immaterial in a circumstantial case of this kind. It found the circumstances amply supported the prosecution case and dismissed the appeal, leaving the courts-below sentence standing. The offence was private-context, not under colour of police duty; the SC text states no district or sentence terms. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 19 October 2006 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1512-1513 of 2005, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. B. Sinha, Dalveer Bhandari, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Police personnel, State Reserve Police, Maharashtra.
- Register number
- MH 00 CW 0002
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal Nos. 1512-1513 of 2005 / (2006) 12 SCC 512
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. B. Sinha, Dalveer Bhandari, JJ.), 19 October 2006
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police personnel, State Reserve Police, Maharashtra
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “We, therefore, have no hesitation in affirming the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge as also the High Court and hold that the circumstances brought on record by the prosecution clearly demonstrate that it was Appellant alone who committed the …” (at para n/a)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Supreme Court of India judgment dated 19 October 2006 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“We, therefore, have no hesitation in affirming the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge as also the High Court and hold that the circumstances brought on record by the prosecution clearly demonstrate that it was Appellant alone who committed the …” (para n/a)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
19 Oct 2006
Order issued
ConcludedThe Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: (2006) 12 SCC 512
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.