Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Suresh Shankarrao More, was convicted by the trial court for the offences of rape, murder, causing disappearance of evidence, and committing an atrocity on a member of a Scheduled Tribe. The prosecution case was that on 6th February 1993, between 12 noon and 2 p.m., the appellant raped and murdered Meera, wife of Ganesh Gujram, at Gawarkheda Forest Shiwar, and hid her dead body in shrubs on Saldhara Kaccha road. The victim was a member of a Scheduled Tribe. The appellant was tried and convicted under Sections 376, 302, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court examined the evidence, particularly the testimony of PW 4 (the husband of the victim), who claimed to have witnessed the incident. The court found that PW 4's testimony was full of contradictions and improvements, and his conduct was unnatural. The medical evidence did not corroborate the prosecution case. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape and Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Sections 376, 302, 201 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires that the circumstances must be fully established and must be consistent only with the guilt of the accused - In the present case, the evidence of the sole eyewitness (PW 4) was found to be unreliable due to material contradictions and improvements, and the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-15). B) Criminal Law - Atrocities Act - Section 3(2)(v) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Offence under this section requires that the victim is a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and the offence is committed on account of such status - In the absence of reliable evidence of the main offences, the charge under this section also fails - Held that the conviction under this section cannot be sustained (Paras 1-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376, 302, 201 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence must be complete and consistent with guilt
- not with innocence
- conviction cannot be based on weak or contradictory testimony
- benefit of doubt must be given to accused when prosecution fails to prove case beyond reasonable doubt
