Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence – Evidence Act, 1872 – ss. 106, 27 – Appellant’s wife found dead with throat slit – Appellant convicted by trial court for offences punishable under ss. 302, 304B/34, 498A/34 IPC – High Court set aside conviction under ss. 304B/34 but sustained under ss. 302, 498A/34 IPC – Prosecution relying on circumstantial evidence to sustain conviction under s. 302 – Courts below found: (i) plea of alibi without substance (ii) bloodstained clothes recovered at Appellant’s parental home (iii) English calendar with Appellant’s name found in the house (iv) Appellant created a scene in the house so as to make it seem like robbery. Held: (1) When prosecution case relies on circumstantial evidence, circumstances from which conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established – Accused ‘must be’ and not merely ‘may be’ guilty – Facts so established should be consistent only with guilt of accused, not explainable on any another hypothesis – Chain of evidence must be so complete to show beyond reasonable doubt that act was committed by accused – (2) Before burden shifts on accused under s. 106 Evidence Act, prosecution has to establish before death occurred, deceased and accused were seen in the house- more so when accused raises specific plea of alibi – (3) For recovery to be admissible on statement made under S. 27 Evidence Act, recovery must be from place exclusively within knowledge of maker – In present case, recovery was from place accessible to all [Paras 8, 9, 10 11, 13, 17].
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.
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.