Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ajim Shah @ Ajju, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad on 11.01.2016 in Sessions Case No.281 of 2013 for the murder of Muzaffar @ Mujju Qureshi under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution case was that on 06.05.2013, the appellant went to Kranti Chowk Police Station and made an extra-judicial confession to Police Head Constable Rajendra Khandagale (PW5) that he had killed Mujju by smashing his head with a stone following a quarrel. The police verified the information and found the deceased's body at a construction site. The father of the deceased, Mukhtar Qureshi (PW2), lodged an FIR. The trial court convicted the appellant based on the extra-judicial confession and circumstantial evidence. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the extra-judicial confession was made while the appellant was in police custody and was not voluntary or credible. The last seen evidence was weak, and the prosecution failed to prove any motive. The court held that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and the prosecution did not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The prosecution relied on extra-judicial confession and last seen evidence. The court held that the extra-judicial confession was not voluntary and credible as the accused was in police custody when made, and the last seen evidence was weak. The chain of circumstances was incomplete, and the prosecution failed to prove motive. Conviction set aside (Paras 1-20). B) Evidence Law - Extra-Judicial Confession - Credibility - Section 24 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - An extra-judicial confession made to a police officer while in custody is inadmissible unless made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate. The court found the confession unreliable as it was made to a police head constable and not corroborated (Paras 10-15). C) Criminal Law - Motive - Failure to Prove - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The prosecution failed to establish any motive for the murder. The court held that absence of motive, though not fatal, weakens the prosecution case in circumstantial evidence (Paras 16-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 based on circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confession is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad on 11.01.2016 in Sessions Case No.281 of 2013 are set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- motive
- last seen theory
- extra-judicial confession
- credibility of witnesses
- benefit of doubt
