Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 r/w Section 34 — Conviction —

September 5th, 2013

Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302 r/w Section 34 — Conviction — Complete chain of evidence, Effect — Existence of illicit relationship between the accused persons/appellants (nephew and wife of deceased) — Conviction affirmed by High Court — Preferred appeals by special leave — Held, both the accused have led to discovery of the knife and the skipping rope used in the crime — Medical evidence corroborates the fact that the deceased died because of strangulation and further there was a stab injury on his chest — Thus, the weapon and the other articles have direct nexus with the injuries found in the post mortem report — Factum of recovery is proven beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution — Prosecution witnesses have clearly deposed that the deceased was lying on the bed and they were told about the arrival of the miscreants and causing the injury — It is also brought in evidence that apart from the appellants the old mother of the deceased was in the house — Trial Judge as well as the High Court rightly disbelieved the attack by any miscreant — All probabilities thought to be covered by the accused-appellants gradually melted and their complicity in the crime and the criminality of the mind stood revealed — Circumstances clearly established that prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused-appellants and the circumstances are conclusive in nature to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved — Appeals dismissed — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 313 — Recovery of offence article — Corroborated by medical evidence, Effect of — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 — Establishment of statement of accused — Effect of.

State of Maharashtra v. Damu S/o Gopinath Shinde and others, (2000)6 SCC 269, State of Punjab v. Gurnam Kaur and others, (2009)11 SCC 225, Aftab Ahmad Anasari v. State of Uttaranchal, (2010)2 SCC 583, Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT) of Delhi, AIR 2011 SC 1863 & State of Maharashtra v. Suresh, (2000)1 SCC 471, Relied on.

(Para 20, 22, 23 & 24)

HELD: Presently to the cumulative effect of the circumstances brought by way of evidence. The prosecution witnesses have clearly deposed that the deceased was lying on the bed and they were told about the arrival of the miscreants and causing the injury. It is also brought in evidence that apart from the appellants the old mother of the deceased was in the house. The learned trial Judge as well as the High Court has rightly disbelieved the attack by any miscreant. It is also interesting to note that the child was immediately recovered by the accused Probal from the road. All probabilities thought to be covered by the accused-appellants gradually melted and their complicity in the crime and the criminality of the mind stood revealed. On a studied scrutiny of the evidence on record, we are convinced that the circumstances that have been proven are that (i) occurrence took place about 1.30 a.m.; (ii) the deceased was found lying dead on his bed; (iii) the accused appellants lived with him in his house and were present at the time the incident took place; (iv) accused Probal made a statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and led the police to recover the knife, the weapon of assault and the missing handle of the skipping rope; (v) the skipping rope was found in the bed room and was recovered at the instance of the wife; (vi) the accused-appellant Rumi Bora gave a false information and tried to mislead the police; (vii) the wife had disowned the information in her statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C; (viii) that the accused persons had not offered any explanation with regard to recovery of weapons from their house except making a bald denial; (ix) there is evidence on record that the wife had developed an illicit relationship with the nephew of the deceased, which provides a motive; (x) nothing had been stated in their examination under Section 313 that any one had any animosity with the deceased; (xi) nothing was stolen from the house; and (xii) the child was immediately found from the road.

(Para 23)

Rumi Bora Dutta v. State of Assam[Bench Strength 2], Criminal Appeal No. 737/2006(24/05/2013), 2013(7) SCALE 535: 2013(4) Supreme 488: 2013(5) SLT 551: 2013(9) JT 296 [B.S. Chauhan, J.: Dipak Misra, J.]

Entry Filed under: Legal Updates