Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Kashiram Ravaji Mene, was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri, in Sessions Case No.4 of 2003 for the murder of his sister-in-law Supriya under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on 10 January 2002, around 8 a.m., the appellant left home with cattle for the field, and Supriya went to fetch firewood. When she did not return, her mother-in-law Bhagirthi found her dead body with a crushed head in the field. The complainant, Atmaram Mene (husband of the victim and brother of the accused), lodged a complaint. The prosecution examined six witnesses, including PW1 Atmaram, who spoke of a grudge due to prior molestation, and PW2 Bhagirthi, who claimed to have last seen the accused with the victim. However, both turned hostile and did not support the prosecution. The trial court convicted based on motive and last seen theory. On appeal, the High Court reappreciated the evidence and found that the motive was not proved, the last seen evidence was unreliable as the witness turned hostile, and the medical evidence (crushed head) was inconsistent with the alleged weapon (stone) as no blood stains were found on the stone. The court held that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing only to guilt, which was lacking. The appeal was allowed, conviction set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on motive and last seen theory - Prosecution case that accused killed his sister-in-law by crushing her head with a stone - Motive of prior molestation alleged but not proved - Last seen evidence from hostile witness unreliable - Medical evidence inconsistent with alleged weapon - Held that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing only to guilt; conviction set aside (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based on circumstantial evidence of motive and last seen theory is sustainable when key witnesses turned hostile and medical evidence is inconsistent.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted. Bail bonds cancelled.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence must be complete and consistent with guilt
- motive alone insufficient
- last seen theory requires proximity in time and place
- hostile witness testimony cannot be relied upon without corroboration
