Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 – Arms Act, 1959 – ss.25 and 27 – Filicide or Suicide – Chain of circumstances – Appellant accused for murdering of his son – Trial Court convicted accused – Conviction confirmed by the High Court – Correctness:
Held: In the instant case, the accused admitted that he owned the gun, but his explanation was that it was hidden by his children, which is not plausible in the teeth of the corroborated deposition of PW-1, 3 & 4 that it was in the custody of the husband and that only he could use it – The accused, admittedly a right-handed person, had gunshot residue particles in his right hand – There were also gunshot residue particles around the gunshot wound by reason of which the son succumbed – The circumstances coupled with the falsity of the claim made by the accused immediately after the detection of the body, to the onlookers and the false explanation given by the accused in his statement u/s.313 of CrPC, regarding both his hands having been forcefully smeared with gunshot residue provides further links in the chain of circumstances which is complete and leads only to the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and not to any hypothesis of innocence – No reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence of the accused. [Paras 25, 26, 27]
Evidence – Circumstantial Evidence – Absence of motive: Held: If the case is built solely upon circumstantial evidence, absence of motive will be a factor that weighs in favour of the accused – Just as a strong motive does not by itself result in a conviction, the absence of motive on that sole ground cannot result in an acquittal – When the eyewitnesses are not convincing, a strong motive cannot by itself result in conviction, likewise when the circumstances are very convincing and provide an unbroken chain leading only to the conclusion of guilt of the accused and not to any other hypothesis; the total absence of a motive will be of no consequence. [Para 20]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. 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.