In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India highlighted the principle of parity in criminal cases, emphasizing that when evidence against two accused individuals is similar or identical, the court cannot convict one and acquit the other. The apex court observed,
“When there is similar or identical evidence of eyewitnesses against two accused by ascribing them the same or similar role, the Court cannot convict one accused and acquit the other. In such a case, the cases of both the accused will be governed by the principle of parity. This principle means that the Criminal Court should decide like cases alike, and in such cases, the Court cannot make a distinction between the two accused, which will amount to discrimination.”
This observation was made while the Supreme Court was hearing an appeal challenging a 2016 Gujarat High Court order. The High Court had previously upheld the conviction of certain individuals while acquitting others in the same case. The appellant, who was among those convicted, challenged the High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court.
Amicus Curiae Shoeb Alam, presenting before the Supreme Court, pointed out that the appellant was identified by only one witness, who claimed that “someone” had snatched her gold chain. Alam emphasized that this witness did not personally know the accused and that no test identification parade was conducted to properly identify him. Furthermore, it was highlighted that nearly 100 individuals were part of the mob present at the crime scene.
Adding to the complexities of the case, the court was informed that the evidence used to convict three other accused in the same case had been discarded by the Supreme Court in separate appeals. Two of these individuals did not challenge their High Court conviction, while the third individual’s appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court without specific reasons.
The case underscores the importance of consistent and fair application of the law, especially when dealing with similar evidence against multiple accused individuals. It also highlights the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that justice is not only served but is also seen to be served, upholding the principles of fairness and equality before the law.
