Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Govind s/o Maneji Vaidya, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, for the murder of his sister-in-law Yamunabai under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and sentenced to life imprisonment. The incident occurred on 28 February 2000 at around 8:00 a.m. in the joint family home at Bhokar, District Nanded. The deceased was the wife of Deoba, the appellant's real brother. At the time of the incident, the appellant, his mother Kewalbai, the deceased, and her two children—Sharayu (aged about 8 years) and a younger son—were present. The appellant's father Maneji had left for work, and Deoba was not at home. The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimony of Sharayu, who claimed that the appellant poured kerosene on the deceased and set her on fire. The trial court convicted the appellant, while acquitting the other accused (Deoba, Maneji, and Kewalbai) of charges under Section 498-A IPC. The appellant appealed against his conviction. The High Court examined the evidence, noting that the child witness's testimony was inconsistent and lacked corroboration. The court found that Sharayu's statements to the police and in court contained contradictions regarding the presence of others and the sequence of events. Additionally, the prosecution failed to explain why other family members present did not intervene or testify. The court held that the circumstantial evidence was incomplete and did not conclusively point to the appellant's guilt. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on sole testimony of child witness - Held that the testimony of child witness Sharayu, aged 8 years, was inconsistent and unreliable, and the prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances leading to the guilt of the appellant - Appeal allowed, conviction set aside (Paras 1-10). B) Evidence Law - Child Witness - Credibility - Section 118 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Testimony of child witness requires corroboration - Held that the child witness's statement was not corroborated by other evidence and contained contradictions, making it unsafe to base conviction (Paras 5-8). C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt - Section 374 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Inconsistencies in prosecution case entitle accused to benefit of doubt - Held that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 9-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for the murder of his sister-in-law Yamunabai is sustainable based on the evidence of child witness Sharayu and other circumstances.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, in Sessions Case No. 68/2000 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. He is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence must be complete and consistent with guilt
- Inconsistencies in witness testimony lead to benefit of doubt
- Acquittal under Section 498-A IPC does not preclude conviction under Section 302 IPC
- Child witness testimony requires corroboration
