Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Keshav Shriram Kendre, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedpur, for the murder of Bapurao Shamrao Nagargoje, a driver of a water tanker, and for robbery and causing disappearance of evidence. The prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence: the deceased was last seen with the appellant on 5th June 2009, the appellant was found in possession of the deceased's mobile phone and other articles, and he allegedly made an extra-judicial confession. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302, 392, 201 read with 34 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence and found that the last seen witness, PW-1, was not reliable as his testimony was inconsistent and he had not seen the appellant with the deceased at the relevant time. The recovery of articles was not properly proved as the panch witnesses turned hostile and the investigating officer's testimony was insufficient. The extra-judicial confession was not corroborated by independent evidence. The High Court held that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and the prosecution had not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed his release unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder and Robbery - Circumstantial Evidence - Sections 302, 392, 201 read with 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Appeal against conviction - The appellant was convicted for murder and robbery of a driver based on circumstantial evidence including last seen theory, recovery of articles, and extra-judicial confession - The High Court found the evidence unreliable as the last seen witness was not credible, recovery was not properly proved, and extra-judicial confession was not corroborated - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302, 392, 201 read with 34 IPC is sustainable based on circumstantial evidence.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30th March 2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedpur in Sessions Case No.75 of 2011 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. He be set at liberty unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence must be complete and consistent with guilt
- chain of circumstances must be unbroken
- benefit of doubt when evidence is unreliable
- conviction cannot be based on weak circumstantial evidence
