Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Gopalrao Dnyanobaji Borkar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge-3, Amravati on 29/04/2019 in Sessions Case No.178/2016 for the murder of his son Shailesh under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on 16/09/2016, there was a quarrel between the accused and the deceased over the deceased's drinking habits and lack of agricultural work. The deceased went to the house of Umesh Dahake, and the informant (mother) spent the night elsewhere. The next morning, the deceased was found dead with injuries. The prosecution relied on motive, last seen evidence, extra-judicial confession, recovery of a weapon, and a dying declaration. The appellant challenged the conviction on the ground that the evidence was insufficient and the chain of circumstances was incomplete. The High Court analyzed the evidence and found that the last seen theory was weak as the time of death was uncertain and the witnesses were not reliable. The extra-judicial confession was not corroborated and the recovery of the weapon was not proved to be at the instance of the accused. The dying declaration was recorded by a police officer and was inconsistent. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the conviction was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The prosecution case rested on circumstantial evidence including motive, last seen, extra-judicial confession, and recovery of weapon. The court held that the chain of circumstances must be complete and must exclude every hypothesis of innocence. The evidence of last seen was doubtful as the time gap was large and the witnesses were not reliable. The extra-judicial confession was not corroborated and the recovery of weapon was not linked to the accused. Held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused is entitled to acquittal. (Paras 1-42) B) Criminal Procedure - Examination of Accused - Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The court noted that the trial court did not properly put incriminating circumstances to the accused, causing prejudice. However, the appellate court independently assessed the evidence and found the conviction unsustainable. (Paras 30-35) C) Evidence - Dying Declaration - Reliability - The dying declaration was recorded by a police officer and not by a Magistrate, and there were inconsistencies. The court held that the dying declaration was not reliable and could not form the basis of conviction. (Paras 20-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 based on circumstantial evidence is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-3, Amravati on 29/04/2019 in Sessions Case No.178/2016 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- chain of circumstances must be complete
- motive
- last seen theory
- extra-judicial confession
- dying declaration
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 313 CrPC
- benefit of doubt
