Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Manisha @ Janglabai Ganesh Chavan, was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Niphad, in Sessions Case No. 27 of 2010 for the murder of her two-month-old daughter Pinky under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The case was based on circumstantial evidence. On 14 March 2010, the dead body of an infant was found in a well in village Satyagaon. The police registered an ADR and conducted an inquest. The post-mortem report indicated death due to asphyxia from drowning. The prosecution alleged that the appellant threw her daughter into the well. The key evidence included an extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the appellant to PW-3, and the testimony of PW-4 who claimed to have seen the appellant near the well. The trial court convicted the appellant. On appeal, the Bombay High Court examined the evidence. The court found that the extra-judicial confession was not reliable as PW-3's testimony was inconsistent and uncorroborated. The last seen evidence was weak and did not establish a complete chain of circumstances. The medical evidence did not conclusively prove that the drowning was homicidal. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed her release unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires complete chain of circumstances pointing only to guilt of accused - In present case, prosecution relied on extra-judicial confession and last seen theory but failed to prove motive or establish reliable evidence - Held that conviction cannot be sustained as circumstances are not conclusive (Paras 1-11). B) Evidence Law - Extra-Judicial Confession - Reliability - Extra-judicial confession must be voluntary, truthful, and corroborated - In present case, alleged confession to PW-3 was not corroborated and PW-3's testimony was inconsistent - Held that extra-judicial confession is weak evidence and cannot form sole basis of conviction (Paras 7-9). C) Criminal Procedure - Benefit of Doubt - Section 235(2) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - When prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, accused is entitled to acquittal - In present case, medical evidence did not conclusively prove drowning as homicidal, and no eyewitnesses - Held that appellant deserves benefit of doubt (Paras 10-11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC for the murder of her infant daughter by drowning is sustainable based on circumstantial evidence and alleged extra-judicial confession.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Directed to be released unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence must be complete and conclusive
- motive must be proved
- dying declaration must be voluntary and reliable
- benefit of doubt must be given to accused
