Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 106 – Murder – Circumstantial Evidence – Last Seen Theory – Burden of Proof – Motive – Appeal against conviction –
The prosecution relied on various circumstances, including the child’s last sighting with the appellant, the discovery of the school bag near the appellant’s house, witness testimonies, and forensic evidence, to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It was alleged that the appellant was owed money by the deceased’s father, creating a motive for the crime.
The appellant denied involvement and raised a defense of denial, alleging a conspiracy by the deceased’s family due to alleged illicit relations between the appellant and the deceased’s mother. However, this defense was not substantiated with credible evidence.
The court considered circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the last seen theory, the presence of the appellant at the scene, forensic findings on soil samples, and the motive established by strained relations between the parties.
In accordance with Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, when facts are within the special knowledge of the accused, the burden of proving those facts lies upon the accused. The appellant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the incriminating circumstances against him.
The court upheld the trial court’s decision, finding all incriminating circumstances except one to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The chain of events pointed convincingly to the appellant’s guilt, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. (Para 10, 29, 37)
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
2023 STPL(Web) 361 HP
[2023 HHC 13654]
Nagender Ram Alias Mukesh Vs. State Of Himachal Pradesh
Cr.A. No. 269 of 2020-Decided on 30-11-2023
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2023-STPLWeb-361-HP.pdf
