Bombay High Court Upholds Acquittal of Husband in Murder Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence. Circumstantial Evidence Fails to Establish Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 IPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the acquittal of the respondent, Manohar Rashmaji Bochra, who was the husband of the deceased Sheetal alias Anjana. The respondent and two others were tried for offences under Sections 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The trial court acquitted all accused, and the State appealed only against the respondent. The deceased was married to the respondent on 19.4.2000 and lived in a rented house at Ranisavargaon. The prosecution alleged that the respondent had an illicit relationship with a co-worker and avoided sending the deceased to her parents' house. On 5.1.2001, the deceased suffered 100% burn injuries in the matrimonial home and died on 7.1.2001. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence: motive (illicit relationship), last seen (the respondent and deceased were together in the house before the incident), and a dying declaration (Exh. 28) allegedly made by the deceased to her father (PW3) and uncle (PW4). The trial court found the evidence unreliable and acquitted the accused. The High Court, on appeal, examined the evidence and found that the dying declaration was not voluntary or reliable as it was recorded in the presence of relatives and the deceased was not in a fit state of mind. The motive of illicit relationship was not proved. The last seen evidence was inconsistent and did not establish proximity. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and that the trial court's acquittal was not perverse. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Standard of Proof - The prosecution must prove each circumstance beyond reasonable doubt and the chain must be complete, pointing only to the guilt of the accused. In the present case, the evidence of last seen, motive, and dying declaration was found unreliable and inconsistent, leading to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 10-15)

B) Evidence Act - Dying Declaration - Reliability - A dying declaration must be voluntary, truthful, and free from tutoring. The court found that the dying declaration (Exh. 28) was not reliable as it was recorded in the presence of relatives and the deceased was not in a fit state of mind due to severe burns and medication. (Paras 12-14)

C) Criminal Law - Murder - Motive - Sufficiency - Mere existence of motive, without credible evidence linking the accused to the crime, is insufficient to sustain a conviction. The prosecution's claim of illicit relationship as motive was not proved. (Para 11)

D) Criminal Law - Murder - Last Seen Theory - Applicability - The last seen theory requires that the accused and deceased were seen together shortly before the incident and that the accused had exclusive opportunity. In this case, the evidence of last seen was inconsistent and did not establish proximity in time. (Paras 10, 15)

E) Evidence Act - Presumption under Section 113B - Dowry Death - The presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 can be raised only if it is shown that soon before her death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry. The prosecution failed to prove such cruelty, and the trial court rightly did not invoke the presumption. (Para 16)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the acquittal of the respondent/accused for offences under Sections 302 and 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable in law.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial court in Sessions Case No. 46/2001 is confirmed. The respondent is acquitted of all charges.

Law Points

  • Circumstantial evidence must be complete and consistent with guilt
  • motive alone insufficient
  • dying declaration must be voluntary and reliable
  • last seen theory requires proximity in time and place
  • presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act not applicable without proof of cruelty soon before death
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (09) 28

Criminal Appeal No. 550 of 2001

2017-09-13

T.V. Nalawade, S.M. Gavhane

Mr. S.J. Salgare (APP for appellant/State), Mr. N.S. Ghanekar (Advocate for respondent)

The State of Maharashtra

Manohar Rashmaji Bochra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against acquittal in a murder case

Remedy Sought

The State of Maharashtra sought conviction of the respondent for offences under Sections 302 and 201 read with 34 IPC.

Filing Reason

The trial court acquitted the respondent and two others; the State appealed against the acquittal of the respondent.

Previous Decisions

The trial court (2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani) acquitted all accused in Sessions Case No. 46/2001.

Issues

Whether the dying declaration (Exh. 28) is reliable and voluntary? Whether the circumstantial evidence, including motive and last seen, is sufficient to prove the guilt of the respondent beyond reasonable doubt?

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant/State argued that the dying declaration was reliable and that the circumstances, including motive and last seen, pointed to the guilt of the respondent. The respondent argued that the dying declaration was not voluntary, the motive was not proved, and the last seen evidence was inconsistent and unreliable.

Ratio Decidendi

In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove each circumstance beyond reasonable doubt and the chain must be complete, pointing only to the guilt of the accused. A dying declaration must be voluntary and reliable; if it is recorded in the presence of relatives and the deceased is not in a fit state of mind, it cannot be relied upon. Motive alone, without credible evidence linking the accused to the crime, is insufficient. The last seen theory requires proximity in time and place. The trial court's acquittal, if not perverse, should not be interfered with.

Judgment Excerpts

The dying declaration (Exh. 28) is not reliable as it was recorded in the presence of relatives and the deceased was not in a fit state of mind. The prosecution has failed to prove the motive of illicit relationship. The evidence of last seen is inconsistent and does not establish proximity in time.

Procedural History

The respondent and two others were tried in Sessions Case No. 46/2001 before the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani, for offences under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 IPC. The trial court acquitted all accused on 31.8.2001. The State filed Criminal Appeal No. 550/2001 before the Bombay High Court (Bench at Aurangabad) against the acquittal of the respondent only. The appeal was reserved on 7.9.2017 and pronounced on 13.9.2017.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 201, 34
  • Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 113B
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Acquittal of Husband in Murder Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence. Circumstantial Evidence Fails to Establish Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 IPC.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against Cancellation of Pattas for Public Utility Land. Land Recorded as Khalihan and Pasture Land Under Section 132 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 Cannot Be Granted Bhumidhari Rights.