Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sakharam Sitaram Bhise, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hingoli in Sessions Trial Case No. 72/2010 for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. 500/- for rape, and imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500/- for murder, with both sentences to run concurrently. The case of the prosecution was that on 28.03.2009, the complainant Yeshwant was away from his village plying an auto/goods transporting vehicle. On 29.03.2009, at about 6:00 to 6:30 pm, he received a call from Arvind Mhatre informing him that his wife Ranjana (the deceased) had fallen ill. He reached Fatepur (Kharab) at about 7:00 pm. His daughter Kalpana (PW3) informed him that the deceased had gone to the forest adjoining the village at about 2:00 pm to collect firewood and did not return. Kalpana and her friend Bali (PW4) went searching and found the deceased with head injuries inflicted by stones, her face and skull smashed. The complainant informed the police. The appellant was arrested on 30.03.2009. The trial court convicted him based on circumstantial evidence including last seen together, recovery of a blood-stained shirt and a stone, and the conduct of the accused. The High Court, after hearing the learned advocate for the appellant and the learned APP, and after thoroughly examining the appeal paper-book and the judgments cited, found that the prosecution case suffered from several infirmities. The evidence of last seen together was not reliable as the witnesses were not consistent. The recovery of articles was doubtful as the panch witnesses turned hostile. The medical evidence did not conclusively prove rape. The chain of circumstances was incomplete and did not point only to the guilt of the accused. The High Court held that the conviction was based on weak and unreliable evidence and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of all charges. The appellant was directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape and Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Sections 376, 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for rape and murder of a married woman based on circumstantial evidence. The High Court found that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances pointing only to the guilt of the accused. The evidence of last seen together was weak, and the recovery of articles was not credible. Held that the conviction cannot be sustained and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-44).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 based on circumstantial evidence is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21-02-2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hingoli in Sessions Trial Case No. 72/2010 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. He shall be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- chain of circumstances must be complete
- benefit of doubt
- presumption of innocence
- conviction based on weak evidence cannot be sustained
