Case Note & Summary
The present appeal challenges the impugned judgment and order dated 30th November 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik in Sessions Case No.355 of 2015, convicting the appellants for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentencing them to life imprisonment and fine. The case of the prosecution is that Rupali, daughter of Babasaheb Kumbharkar (P.W.1), got married to appellant no.1 (accused no.1) on 24th April 2012. She was living in her matrimonial home with her husband, in-laws, and appellant no.2 (accused no.3, younger brother of accused no.1). In November 2012, she conceived pregnancy, but on 28th June 2013, there was intrauterine death of the fetus due to lack of blood supply. In March 2015, she gave birth to a baby boy. On 23rd August 2015, P.W.1 called her father-in-law Dashrath to fetch Rupali for Raksha Bandhan. At about 1.30 pm, appellant no.2 informed P.W.1 that Rupali was no more. Dashrath Gade approached Vani Police Station and reported that his elder son Chetan had informed him that Rupali attempted suicide by hanging, but he suspected she was not dead and was taking her to the doctor. On reaching Vani Hospital, he was informed that Rupali had died. An AD No.38/2015 was registered. The trial court convicted the appellants. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove homicidal death. The medical evidence (P.W.3 Dr. Sunil Jadhav) opined cause of death as asphyxia due to hanging but also noted possibility of suicidal hanging. There were inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses regarding the last seen theory and motive. The court held that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and the conviction could not be sustained. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellants were acquitted. They were directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires complete chain of circumstances pointing only to guilt of accused - In the present case, prosecution failed to prove homicidal death and there were inconsistencies in testimonies of witnesses - Held that conviction cannot be sustained and appellants are entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-18). B) Evidence Law - Homicidal Death - Proof of - Medical Evidence - Where medical evidence does not conclusively prove cause of death as homicidal, conviction for murder cannot be sustained - In this case, doctor opined cause of death as asphyxia due to hanging but also noted possibility of suicidal hanging - Held that prosecution failed to establish homicidal death beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 10-12). C) Criminal Law - Last Seen Theory - Applicability - Last seen theory requires that accused and deceased were last seen together in a manner consistent with guilt - In this case, witnesses did not see accused with deceased at relevant time and there was delay in reporting - Held that last seen theory cannot be applied (Paras 13-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302 and 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable based on circumstantial evidence.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellants acquitted. They be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- Homicidal death
- Last seen theory
- Motive
- Inconsistencies in prosecution case
- Benefit of doubt
