Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 27 – Murder – Conviction set aside – Circumstantial evidence. The appellants were accused of strangulating the deceased to death and disposing of his body in a pond.
The prosecution’s case primarily relied on the memorandum statements of the accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, claiming that these statements led to the discovery of the deceased’s body. The Court emphasized the principles established in the case law regarding conviction based on circumstantial evidence, highlighting that suspicion alone cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt.
However, upon examining the evidence, the Court found serious deficiencies in the prosecution’s case. It noted inconsistencies in the statements of witnesses and highlighted that the discovery of the dead body was not solely based on the information provided by the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
The Court observed that the prosecution failed to establish that the dead body was discovered solely based on the accused’s statements and that nobody had prior knowledge of its existence. The Court also critiqued the Investigating Officer’s failure to explain the information provided by the accused that led to the discovery of the body.
Ultimately, the Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove any incriminating circumstances against the appellants beyond a reasonable doubt, and therefore, the appeals were allowed, and the convictions and sentences were set aside. (Para 22 to 28)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[2024 STPL(Web) 254 SC = 2024 INSC 299]
Ravishankar Tandon Vs. State Of Chhattisgarh
Criminal Appeal No. 3869 of 2023 With Criminal Appeal No. 2740 Of 2023 Criminal Appeal No. Of 2024 [Arising Out Of Slp (Criminal) No. 837 Of 2024] Criminal Appeal No. Of 2024 [Arising Out Of Slp (Criminal) No. 1174 Of 2024]-Decided on 10-4-2024
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2024-STPLWeb-254-SC.pdf
