Rajkishore Purohit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in acquitting respondent no.2 under Section 302/34 IPC, emphasizing that mere presence at the scene with co-accused can infer common intention, even without overt acts or possession of weapons. The Court found that the High Court's reasoning lacked adequate appreciation of evidence regarding the existence of common intention among the accused. Consequently, the acquittal was set aside, and the conviction under Section 302 IPC was reinstated, affirming the trial court's decision.