Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302/34 and 201/34 – Murder – Prosecution case that three persons-appellant, her son and another lady convicted and sentenced u/ss.302/34 and 201/34 for the alleged murder of the son of the informant – Informant’s case that the appellant and her son, were in illegal occupation of the house owned by the victim together with the other lady and some unknown persons murdered his son because he wanted to get the house vacated – Other lady died pending appeal – High Court upheld the order passed by the trial court – Correctness: Held: Evidence led by the prosecution not sufficient and lacks credibility so as to form a complete chain of incriminating circumstances warranting the affirmation of the prosecution case – Entire case of the prosecution discarded – Prosecution failed to prove even a single of these so-called incriminating circumstances so as to justify the conviction of the appellant for the charge of murdering the informant’s son – Trial court as well as the High Court in appellate jurisdiction grossly erred while appreciating the evidence and holding the testimony of the witnesses who gave evidence on the last seen together theory and the extra-judicial confession theory to be reliable – Theory of motive attributed by the prosecution to the appellant and her son not convincing – Alleged motive neither justified nor substantiated by evidence – Both the courts have, despite the negative FSL report, relied upon the socalled incriminating recoveries – Reliance placed by the courts below on the recoveries misplaced and unjustified – Furthermore, the negative FSL report makes the recoveries inconsequential – Impugned judgment by the High Court and the trial court do not stand to scrutiny and are quashed and set aside – Appellant is acquitted of the charges – Entire case of the prosecution being discarded, the benefit extended to the non-appealing accused, son of the appellant and is acquitted of the charges. [Paras 13-39]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. 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.