Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Pravin Tulsidas Kadu, was convicted by the trial court under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Rajendra Ronghe and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on 2 June 2014, the appellant came to the dhaba run by the deceased and his son Rahul (PW1), demanded a cigarette arrogantly, and later that night the deceased was found dead. The complainant Rahul alleged that the appellant was last seen with the deceased. However, the High Court found that the evidence of the complainant was inconsistent with other witnesses, including the medical evidence regarding the time of death. The court noted that the complainant's testimony was not corroborated by independent witnesses and that the prosecution failed to establish motive or a complete chain of circumstances. The court held that the benefit of doubt must be given to the appellant and accordingly allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and acquitting the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Appeal against conviction - Prosecution case based on last seen theory and motive - Evidence of complainant and other witnesses found inconsistent and unreliable - Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt - Benefit of doubt given to appellant - Conviction set aside and appellant acquitted (Paras 1-20). B) Evidence Law - Credibility of Witnesses - Inconsistencies in testimony - Complainant's testimony contradicted by other witnesses and medical evidence - Court held that such inconsistencies create reasonable doubt - Witnesses not reliable (Paras 10-18). C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against conviction - Appellate court's power to re-appreciate evidence - High Court re-appreciated evidence and found no corroboration - Held that conviction cannot be sustained (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Rajendra Ronghe is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Benefit of doubt
- Inconsistent evidence
- Credibility of witnesses
- Circumstantial evidence
- Last seen theory
- Motive
- Section 302 IPC
