IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Appeal No. 598 of 2017
.
Reserved on: 27.09.2019
Decided on : 04.10.2019
Kamal Kumar …..Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh . ….Respondent
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Chauhan, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? Yes.
For the Appellant : Mr. Ranjeet Singh Cheema, Mr. Victor
r Dhissa, Mr. Kuldeep and Mr. Ashwani K.
Negi, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Additional Advocate
General with Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Ms.
Svaneel Jaswal, Deputy Advocate General
and Mr. Ram Lal Thakur, Assistant
Advocate General.
_ __
Anoop Chitkara, Judge
The instinct of a girl, to be caring, cost life of a 14 years
young female, who had gone to collect firewood, so that her middle-
aged foster mother gets warmth and respite from the biting cold of
the winters of Manali in Himachal Pradesh. It was 4.00 p.m., on
December 15, 2014, when realizing her duty to help her mother, who
had brought this girl from a Nepali family seven years before, went to
the banks of the River Beas, to collect fuelwood, sharing her
household responsibility. The blanket of a meter of snow, fallen three-
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
2
four days before, had covered every exposed surface. Neither she nor
her mother knew that predators are no more wild animals, but the
.
perverts always looking for prey to satisfy their lust on finding a
vulnerable girl. When she did not return till 5.30 p.m., and it started
getting dark, with days already closest to their shortest, her mother
Banti Devi got frightened and inquired in the neighborhood about her
daughter. On that un-fateful day, the Sun, as usual, had set in Manali
somewhere at 5.15 p.m., and the Moon did not show her face at all.
Braving snow, the neighbors did a frantic search to locate her, but
could not find her. It had already become very dark, and there were no
street lights on these difficult mountainous terrains. Her foster mother
made phone calls to her married daughter as well as her daughter-in-
law and apprised them about missing of the victim.
2. The girl could not be traced and was out of her home in
the blood-freezing winters of Manali. After the long cruel cold
night, when the day broke, her mother, Banti, along with one Sheetal
went in search of the young girl towards River Beas. At one place, the
snow had compressed, foot and dragging marks were visible, blood
was also lying on such compressed snow and the stones. At some
distance, was lying a chopper, somewhat submerged in snow, maybe
because of shame, as the girl had faith on it to cut the wood and
protect her. At some distance, closer to the River, the pajama, one
2
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
3
shoe, and muffler, which the victim was wearing at the time of going
to collect fuelwood, lay scattered. On noticing the clothes of her
.
daughter, she returned to the habitat and informed her daughter
Rajni and daughter-in-law Sunita who, by the time, had also reached
her house. On this Rajni made a phone call to Police Station about
missing of the victim. After that, all the villagers made a frantic hunt
to search the girl along with the River. The water level of River Beas
would have gone up because of the falling tears of the villagers, but
all prayers and efforts failed to trace either the girl or her body.
3. On receipt of the phone call, the police swung into
action. The Investigating officer reached the village, recorded the
statement of Banti Devi, the foster mother of the missing girl, under
Section 154 of CrPC. The police party reached the spot and lifted the
chopper, pajama, string of pajama, dhatu (headgear) with corners
stained with blood, one blue color rexine shoe, one out of pair of tops
(earring); sealed these in parcels and took in possession. The police
also lifted from the spot, the blood along with the blood-stained
snow, stored it in a glass bottle, and sealed the same. The police also
found hair from the spot, sealed and preserved the same. A
photographer took photographs of the place and made a video
recording.
3
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
4
4. On finding a prima facie case of abduction, in order to
commit murder, FIR No. 221 of 2014, dated 16.12.2014, was
.
registered under Section 364 of IPC in the file of Police Station
Manali, District Kullu, H.P. The investigation led to the clues about the
involvement of the appellant and arrested him on the next day i.e.,
December 17, 2014, at about 8.30 p.m. Immediately after his arrest,
he was taken for his medico-legal examination to Civil Hospital at
Manali, where Dr. Ashok Rana (PW-7), on physical examination of the
accused, noticed a punch out on left interior portion of tongue with
irregular abrasion. The doctor also noticed abrasions on both the
cheeks tapering downwards. On asking of the police, the doctor took
samples of blood and semen and also preserved the underwear worn
by the victim. On the next day, the accused made a disclosure
statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act (Ext. PW-4/A)
and stated that he could point out the place on the bank of River
Beas, where he had attempted to commit rape upon the victim, and
thereafter, he had thrown the victim in River Beas. After that, the
accused led the police party to the bank of River Beas and pointed
out to the place where, on finding the girl alone cutting fuelwood, he
attempted to commit rape on her and after that, threw her into the
River. From his house the Police recovered, his pants and jacket,
which had bloodstains on it; one sweater and two T-shirts.
4
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
5
5. During the investigation, the police came to know that
on December 16, 2014, at 10.30 a.m., the accused had visited a
.
nearby clinic at Patli Kuhal. The said clinic belonged to Dr. Ram Singh
(PW-9), to whom the accused had shown his tongue. The doctor
noticed an ulcer of the dimension of two centimetres on the tongue
of the accused. The accused had also revealed to the doctor that he
had sustained this injury on his tongue due to fall as he had slipped
on the snow. However, the doctor did not find any other external
injury on the person of the accused.
6. The police sent the evidence collected from the spot as
well as the clothes of the accused to the Forensic Science Laboratory,
Mandi, which vide report Ext. PA found human blood of Group ‘AB’ on
dathu of the victim, T-shirt, and upper tracksuit of the accused. The
laboratory detected blood of group ‘AB’ on the snow lifted from the
spot. The blood group of the accused was also found to be ‘AB.’
During the investigation, the police had converted the FIR by adding
Section 302, 376 of IPC and Section 4 of the Prevention of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, after now called POCSO.
7. However, in the report under Section 173(2) of CrPC, the
SHO sought prosecution for the commission of offences punishable
under Section 302, 376 read with Section 511 of IPC and did not
invoke the provisions of POCSO. Accordingly, the trial Court framed
5
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
6
charges only under Sections 302, 376 read with Section 511 of IPC,
to which the accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
.
8. After completion of the trial, in compliance with Section
313 Cr.P.C., the Trial Court put to the accused, the incriminating
circumstances appeared in evidence, and in answer to the
circumstance of the accused visiting PW-9 Dr. Ram Singh on
December 16, 2014, to get treatment of ulcer on his tongue, the
accused explained that there was no ulcer on his tongue; however, he
stated to the doctor that he had a fall on December 15, 2014. The
accused did not lead any evidence in his defence.
9. Vide judgment dated August 23, 2017, passed in
Sessions Trial No. 40 of 2015, the Sessions Judge held the accused
guilty of both the charges and sentenced him to undergo life
imprisonment under Section 302 of IPC along with fine of Rs.
10,000/- and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years along
with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section
376 read with Section 511 of IPC. The period of detention already
undergone by the accused-convict was set off, given the provisions of
Section 428 of CrPC.
10. Challenging the judgment of conviction the accused-
convict has come up before this Court, by filing this appeal under
Section 374 (2) of C.rP.C.
6
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
7
11. We have heard Mr. Ranjeet Singh Cheema Mr.
Ashwani Kumar Negi, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr.
.
Vinod Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, and Ms. Svaneel
Jaswal, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the State. We have
also waded through the entire record.
ANALYSIS AND REASONING:
12. The case set up by the prosecution is based entirely
upon the circumstantial evidence. After appreciation of the evidence,
the following circumstances are culled out:
(a) Banti Devi (PW-1) had three children, all of whom were
married and living separately; in the year 2007, she had adopted a
seven years old girl from a family of immigrants of Nepal, and since
then she (victim) was staying with her foster mother, in their rented
premises situated at Alu Ground:
(i) On appreciation of the statement of PW-1 Banti Devi, which
gets corroboration from her previous statement recorded under
Section 154 of CrPC, (Ext. PW-1/B), the prosecution proved that
she was a tenant in the house of Smt. Yug Doll and was
residing in Alu Ground for the last 30 years, where she was
running a Tea Stall. She had three children, out of whom, two
were daughters, and one was son, and all three were married
long back. One of the daughters, named Rajni, was married in
7
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
8
Nirmand area of Kullu District. During the year 2007, she had
gone to meet her daughter, where, from a Nepali family, she
.
had adopted the victim. It is also proved that her husband used
to live with her as well as with his son, who was residing at a
distance of 200 or 300 meters away from her house in Alu
Ground. After winter vacations, her daughter Rajni had visited
the home of her brother and was staying in his house. This
evidence is duly corroborated in material particulars by the
testimony of (PW-2) Rajni. Hence, the circumstance is proved.
(b) There is no evidence pointing out towards the involvement of
either PW-1 Banti Devi or any of her family members in the crime:
(i) Investigating Officer did not find involvement of her foster
mother or her family members, in the crime. PW-1 Banti Devi
explicitly stated that when her daughter did not return home for
more than one and a half hour, then she inquired in her
neighbourhood. After that, she made a phone call to her
daughter Rajni and daughter-in-law Sunita and apprised them
of the fact of her gone missing. Her statement recorded under
Section 154 of Cr.P.C. mentions that the villagers had also gone
to search the missing girl. It had come in the evidence that 2-3
days before December 15, 2014, the entire area had
experienced hefty snowfall due to which temperature must
8
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
9
have significantly dropped and would have made terrain
slippery. After the day broke, she along with one person named
.
Sheetal, went to search the missing girl, and while searching on
the banks of River Beas, she noticed her clothes on the banks
of the River, along with blood on the snow. Immediately after
that, she informed her daughter, daughter-in-law, and all the
villagers went to the spot. Her daughter also made a phone call
to the police, upon which, the police reached the place at
around 9.00 p.m.
(ii) All these facts point out towards a natural human behavior in
such a situation. When she could not go for an extensive search
at night, she went searching for the victim in the morning.
Indeed the area had experienced a heavy snowfall, which would
make walking hazardous and risky. Needless to say that the
prosecution was under an obligation to examine at least
Sheetal, who had searched with (PW-1 Banti Devi) and at least,
one of the neighbours, to lend further corroboration to this fact.
But the failure of the Prosecution would not weaken the other
evidence, which is already proved on record. Undoubtedly,
keeping in view the gravity of the offence, the prosecution did
not do its job well.
9
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
10
(iii) Eyebrows are raised on this lackluster attitude because the
victim was a poor girl belonging to a family of Nepali
.
immigrants. Be that as it may. There is no evidence pointing
towards the involvement of either PW-1 Banti Devi or any of her
family members in the crime.
(c) On December 15, 2014, at around 4.00 p.m., the victim had
gone all alone towards River Beas to fetch fuel wood; the victim and
her foster mother (PW-1) Banti Devi were staying mostly alone:
(i) It has come in the cross-examination of PW-1 Banti that her
husband was living with her as well as with his son. It has further
come in her testimony that on December 15, 2014, at about
4.00 p.m., the victim had gone to fetch fuelwood. It finds
corroboration from the earliest version recorded under Section
154 CrPC. (Ext. PW-1/B), wherein the victim had told her mother
that she would be going towards Beas River to fetch firewood.
On the next morning, her clothes, one tops, and one shoe were
noticed on the bank of the River Beas, which proves this fact.
(d) On December 15, 2014, around 2.30 p.m., PW-3 Mehar Chand
and Bhuvnesh (not examined), were consuming alcohol in the Dhaba,
situated in Alu Ground. At around 3.00 p.m., the accused Kamal
Kumar visited the said Dhaba, joined their company and started
10
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
11
drinking alcohol with them. At about 4.00 p.m., Kamal Kumar left the
Dhaba:
.
(i) PW-3 Mehar Chand testified that on December 15, 2014, he
along with one Bhuvnesh Kumar (not examined) had visited the
Dhaba of one Kumar situated at Alu Ground. He stated that
they started consuming liquor in Dhabha and at around 3.00
p.m., Kamal Kumar visited the Dhaba and joined their company
and started drinking alcohol. After an hour, at about 4.00 p.m.,
Kamal Kumar left the Dhaba, perhaps for attending some call
and after that did not return. The English version of this
statement is at variance with the statement recorded in Hindi.
As per the English version, Kamal Kumar went out of the
Dhabha saying that he had to attend call of the nature, to the
contrary, in the statement recorded in Hindi, which is in
consonance with the statement of Ms. Shanu Maya (PW-6), who
was working in the said Dhaba, which belonged to her brother
named, Kumar, reads that at about 4.00 p.m., after listening to
a phone call, Kamal had left the Dhaba and after that, did not
return. On comparison of these statements what transpires is
that Kamal Kumar had left the Dhaba by saying that he is to
attend a phone call and then he did not return.
11
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
12
(ii) The collective reading of these statements leads to the
irrefutable conclusion that Kamal Kumar had left the Dhaba at
.
4.00 p.m. What is established beyond any reasonable doubt is
that Kamal Kumar was present in the Dhaba and he had left
the said Dhaba situated, in Alu Ground, at 4.00 p.m. and before
that, he had consumed alcohol for an hour.
(e) On December 15, 2014, a little after 5.45 p.m., after taking
alcohol, when PW-3 Mehar Chand along with Bhuvnesh, had left the
Dhaba and were returning to their homes, then on the way at Alu
Ground, near his shop, Kamal Kumar met them and they noticed
scratch marks on his face and blood in his mouth:
(i) PW-3 Mehar Chand has testified, on oath, that after consuming
alcohol from 2.30 p.m. up to 5.45 p.m., he along with Bhuvnesh
left the Dhaba and closed his shop. After that, they were
proceeding towards their homes, and near his shop at Alu
Ground itself, Kamal Kumar met them, and they noticed scratch
marks on his face and blood in his mouth. The prosecution did
not examine Bhuvnesh; however, it is not the quantity, but the
quality of the evidence which matters. Although, the Sun would
set on December 15, 2014, at around 5.15. P.M., in Manali, but
still the visibility would be excellent at about 5.45 p.m. When the
12
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
13
places are covered with the snow, then due to the reflection,
there is more diffusion of light.
.
(ii) Furthermore, PW-3 Mehar Chand was a local person, and so was
the accused, both belonging to the same area and the same
locality, whereas the victim hailed from Nepal. Despite that he
testified against the accused. This shows that Mehar Chand was
a sterling witness.
(iii) The defence tried to impeach the credibility of (PW-3) Mehar
Chand by suggesting that the police had caught and threatened
them to implicate them in the crime and, as such, they made a
false statement. The presence of these two witnesses in the
Dhaba is corroborated by (PW-6) Ms. Shanu Maya, who stated
that they were in the Dhaba till 4.30 p.m. Although, there is a
contradiction about the exact time when Vicky (Bhuvnesh) and
Mehar Chand had left the Dhaba; according to Ms. Shanu Maya
(PW-6), they had left the Dhaba around 4.30 p.m., whereas
according to (PW-3) Mehar Chand, they had left the Dhaba at
5.45 p.m. Still, this contradiction will not make them
accomplices of the crime. It is pertinent to mention that the
occurrence was of December 15, 2014, and the statements of
these witnesses were recorded in the Court in May 2016, i.e.,
after one and a half years. Rarely do people note the time when
13
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
14
they leave the places unless they are leaving workplaces,
schools, or have to board buses, trains, or planes or to reach
.
their workplaces. It was evening time. Hence, the said
contradiction is minor.
(iv) It has also come in the evidence that (PW-3) Mehar Chand was
also running a shop at Alu Ground, and he stated that after
leaving his Dhaba, he had closed his shop. It must have
consumed some time.
(v) Despite this contradiction, the material fact, which the
prosecution has successfully proved is that little after 5.45 p.m.,
at Alu Ground, (PW-3) Mehar Chand noticed scratch marks on
the cheeks of Kamal Kumar and blood in his mouth.
(f) Recovery of articles of the victim, namely pajama (salwar),
lower, string of the pajama which was lying separately from it,
headgear (dhatu), socks, one blue colored shoe, tops (earring),
chopper to cut fuelwood, was effected from the bank of Beas River in
the morning of December 16, 2014:
(i) When the victim did not return home on the night of
December 2014, then in the early morning on December 15,
2014, Banti Devi (PW-1) along with Sheetal, started searching
her and went towards Beas River. On the banks of the River,
they noticed clothes of the victim, namely her salwar (lower)
14
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
15and its string separated from it, one of her blue coloured shoe,
one tops, her headgear and the chopper, which she had taken
.
to cut wood. All these articles were identified by PW-1 (Banti
Devi) to be belonging to the victim.
(ii) It has come in the statement of PW-2 Rajni, that she had
telephonically informed the police. She also testified about the
presence of the clothes of the victim on the bank of the River.
The police reached the spot and recovered all these articles,
vide Recovery Memo (Ext. PW-1). The photographs Exts. PW-
1/A-1 and A-2, depict these clothes. Therefore, this fact is also
proved.
(g) Corpus Delcti and the involvement of the Convict:
(i) It has come in the evidence that despite frantic efforts
made by the villagers, Nepalis and the divers etc., the police
could not recover the dead body of the victim. However, the
banks of River Beas witnessed the tell-tales of her thrown into
the River.
(ii) In the cross-examination, PW-15 SHO/Inspector Firoz
Khan, in answer to the suggestion of the Defence, about the
quantity of water in River Beas, had stated that he could not
say with absolute certainty that what would be the level of
water in River Beas in those days and that it would be shallow.
15
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
16
What the defence tried to suggest by this suggestion, was that
because of the low level of water in winters, the dead body
.
would not have floated away to a far of distance, and as such,
there is no evidence that the assailant had thrown the girl into
the River Beas. To analyze this plea of the defence, it is
essential to note that it had come in the evidence and that too,
by the suggestion of the defence lawyer, that 2-3 days before
December 14, 2014, this area had experienced hefty snowfall.
It had also come in the suggestion that the snowfall was so
heavy that it took five days to restore traffic and the snow was
around three to four feet. Even the SHO stated that despite
getting information from the Investigating Officer about the
presence of the clothes on the bank of River Beas, he could
reach the spot at around 4.00 p.m. because he had gone to
rescue 10-15 people trapped in heavy snow and after saving
them, he could reach the place.
(iii) Although, in winters, due to the drop in temperature,
melting of snow slows, bringing down the water level in the
Himalayan Rivers to considerably low. However, the area had
experienced heavy snowfall to the extent of three to four feet,
just three to five days before December 14, 2014. It would
have led to the melting of snow, especially in the lower
16
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
17
altitudes, like banks of the River. The snow is visible in the
photographs of the spot, showing blood on stones and snow,
.
Ext.PW-11/A-3, Ext.PW-11/A-5 Ext.PW-11/A-6.
(iv) It is safe to conclude that after the heavy snowfall, due to
melting of snow, the water level in the River would have gone
up, as such, it was quite possible that when a small girl, just of
the age of 14 years, would be thrown in the River, then her
body could be washed away up to long-distance. Fury of the
River Beas is so terrible that even the vehicles are sometimes
not traced, what to talk of a body of a small girl.
(v) On December 17, 2014, the Investigators had taken the
accused to Civil Hospital Manali, where PW-7 Dr. Ashok Rana
had extracted blood from the body of accused, and after
sealing the vial with the seals of the Civil Hospital, he had
handed over it to the Investigating Officer. On 19 October,
2014, the Investigating Officer had taken accused Kamal
Kumar to Civil Hospital Manali, where (PW-5) Dr. Dorje Angrup
had medically examined him and also extracted samples of his
hair. After sealing, the same was handed over to the police.
The blood and hair collected from the crime scene, along with
the samples of blood and hair of the accused extracted by the
doctors, were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory at Mandi for
17
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
18
comparison. As per result No. 4 of the Report (Ext. P-A) of the
Forensic Science Laboratory, the blood lifted from the spot and
.
the blood of the accused was of ‘AB’ Group. Similarly, and
more importantly, the Laboratory vide its Result No. 10, found
the human hair lifted from the spot to be consistent and
comparable with the sample of hair extracted from the head of
accused-Kamal Kumar.
(vi) There is no doubt that the prosecution did not send the
blood and hair samples obtained from the spot for its
comparison with the blood and hair samples of the accused for
conducting a DNA test, as mandated under Section 53 (A) (2)
(iv) of IPC. Still, this deficiency in the investigation needs
assessment in the light of the other evidence proved on record.
At this stage, it shall be appropriate to remind the State of the
pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Krishan
Kumar Malik Vs. State of Haryana, 2011 (7) SCC 130. It is
appropriate to extract a relevant portion of the judgment
mentioned above, which reads as follows:
“44. Now, after the incorporation of Section 53 (A) in the
Criminal Procedure Code, w.e.f. 23.06.2006, brought to
our notice by learned counsel for the Respondent-State,
it has become necessary for the prosecution to go in for
DNA test in such type of cases, facilitating the
prosecution to prove its case against the accused. Prior
to 2006, even without the aforesaid specific provision in18
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
19the Criminal Procedure Code prosecution could have
still resorted to this procedure of getting the DNA test or
analysis and matching of semen of the Appellant with.
that found on the undergarments of the prosecutrix to
make it a fool proof case, but they did not do so, thus
they must face the consequences.”
(vii) Why did the Investigating Officer not send DNA for
comparison, is not explained, probably because the victim
belonged to the most impoverished strata of Society. It pains
one’s heart to see such a callous approach towards the people
who do not have any say in the system.
(viii) The other evidence, which conclusively proves the presence
of Kamal Kumar on the bank of Beas, has come in the evidence
of the mother of the victim; wherein she had noticed the clothes
of the victim, as well as blood on stones and snow, which the
police had collected as evidence. Although the prosecution did
not conduct DNA matching, still blood grouping was done by the
Laboratory, and the blood of the accused was of Group ‘AB,’ and
the blood found on the bank of River Beas near to the clothes of
the victim was also of Group ‘AB.’ Moreover, as per the report of
Forensic Science Laboratory, the hair recovered by the police
from the spot, in the morning hours of December 16, 2014,
matched with the samples of hair taken from the accused. All
this evidence is sufficient to establish that the accused was
19
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
20
present on the banks of the River Beas, where his blood had
oozed out. The accused had bleeding from his tongue, which,
.
according to the doctors, was due to tooth bite. The hair
recovered from the spot where the clothes of the victim were
recovered, matched with the hair of the accused.
(ix) The accused had removed the pajama of the victim,
exposing her privates. Pajama was lying scattered along with the
string taken off from it, which confirms violence in the opening
of the pajama and the resistance put up by the young girl. The
accused had no enmity with her; she had no money or jewellery
to be robbed; her only fault was that she had genitals, similar to
from where the accused had also taken birth. The Motive is
obvious. It would be doing injustice to the victim to assume the
absence of rape in the absence of medical evidence or the
absence of her body.
(x) Judicial Precedents on the law relating to Corpus Delicti
(a) In Ram Chandra v. State of U.P., AIR 1957 SC 381, a three judge
bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,
6. In this case the outstanding feature is that there is no
tangible evidence, either of a direct or of a
circumstantial nature, in support of the fact that the
murder has been committed. It is true that in law a
20
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
21
conviction for an offence does not necessarily depend
upon the corpus delicti being found. There may be
reliable evidence, direct or circumstantial, of the
.
commission of the murder though the corpus delicti are
not traceable.
(b). In Rama Nand and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1981) 1
SCC 511, the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,
“…In other words, we would take it that the corpus
delicti, i.e., the dead-body of the victim was not found in
this case. But even on that assumption, the question
remains whether the other circumstances established on
record were sufficient to lead to the conclusion that
within all human probability, she had been murdered by
Rama Nand appellant? It is true that one of the essential
ingredients of the offence of culpable homicide required
to be proved by the prosecution is that the accused
caused the death” of the person alleged to have been
killed.
28. This means that before seeking to prove that the
accused is the perpetrator of the murder, it must be
established that homicidal death has been caused.
Ordinarily, the recovery of the dead-body of the victim or
a vital part of it, bearing marks of violence, is sufficient
proof of homicidal death of the victim. There was a time
when under the old English Law, the finding of the body
of the deceased was held to be essential before a
person was convicted of committing his culpable
homicide.
“I would never convict”, said Sir Mathew Hale, “a person
of murder or manslaughter unless the fact were proved
to be done, or at least the body was found dead”. This
was merely a rule of caution, and not of law. But in those
times when execution was the only punishment for
murder, the need for adhering to this cautionary rule was
greater. Discovery of the dead-body of the victim bearing
physical evidence of violence, has never been considered
as the only mode of proving the corpus delicti in murder.
Indeed, very many cases are of such a nature where the
discovery of the dead-body is impossible. A blind
adherence to this old “body” doctrine would open the
21
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
22
door wide open for many a heinous murderer to escape
with impunity simply because they were cunning and
clever enough to destroy the body of their victim. In the
.
context of our law, Sir Hale’s enunciation has to be
interpreted no more than emphasising that where the
dead-body of the victim in a murder case is not found,
other cogent and satisfactory proof of the homicidal
death of the victim must be adduced by the prosecution.
Such proof may be by the direct ocular account of an
eye-witness, or by circumstantial evidence, or by both.
But where the fact of corpus delicti, i.e. ‘homicidal death’
is sought to be established by circumstantial evidence
alone, the circumstances must be of a clinching and
definitive character unerringly leading to the inference
that the victim concerned has met a homicidal death.
Even so, this principle of caution cannot be pushed too
far as requiring absolute proof. Perfect proof is seldom
to be had in this imperfect world, and absolute certainty
is a myth. That is why under Section 3, Evidence Act, a
fact is said to be “proved”, if the Court considering the
matters before it, considers its existence so probable
that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of
the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it
exists. The corpus delicti or the fact of homicidal death,
therefore, can be proved by telling and inculpating
circumstances which definitely lead to the conclusion
that within all human probability, the victim has been
murdered by the accused concerned.”
(c). In Lakshmi and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2002) 7 SCC
198, the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,
“16. Undoubtedly, the identification of the body, cause
of death and recovery of weapon with which the injury
may have been inflicted on the deceased are some of
the important factors to be established by the
prosecution in an ordinary given case to bring home the
charge of offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code.
This, however, is not an inflexible rule. It cannot be held
as a general and broad proposition of law that where
these aspects are not established, it would be fatal to
the case of the prosecution and in all cases and
eventualities, it ought to result in the acquittal of those
22
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
23
who may be charged with the offence of murder. It
would depend on the facts and circumstances of each
case. A charge of murder may stand established
.
against an accused even in absence of identification of
the body and cause the death.”
(d). In State of Karnataka v. M.V. Mahesh, (2003) 3 SCC 353, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court observed,
“3…..It is no doubt true that even in the absence of the
corpus delicti it is possible to establish in an
appropriate case commission of murder on
appropriate material being made available to the
court. In this case no such material is made available
to the court.”
(e). In Rishipal v. State of Uttarakhand, (2013) 12 SCC 551,
Supreme Court holds,
14. In the absence of corpus delicti what the court
looks for is clinching evidence that proves that the
victim has been done to death. If the prosecution is
successful in providing cogent and satisfactory proof of
the victim having met a homicidal death, absence of
corpus delicti will not by itself be fatal to a charge of
murder. Failure of the prosecution to assemble such
evidence will, however, result in failure of the most
essential requirement in a case involving a charge of
murder.
(h) Extra Judicial Confession:
(i) PW-3 Mehar Chand stated that at about 5.40 p.m., on
December 15, 2014, when he was with Bhuvnesh, they again
met the accused and noticed blood in his mouth and scratch
marks on his cheeks, and they obviously inquired from him
23
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
24
about these injuries. The accused explained to them that he
quarrelled with a girl and the said girl gave a tooth bite on his
.
tongue, and due to anger, he threw her in the flowing River. At
that time, these people thought that he was joking, but after 2-3
days, they realized that he was speaking the truth.
(ii). The accused had consumed liquor for at least one hour
with these people. On being confronted with the injuries, he had
revealed to them about throwing the girl into the River by him;
the cordial relations would infer that he had reason to reveal and
explain to them. By that time, he would not be expected to meet
some people and suddenly on being confronted by them, came
up with half the explanation. Thus, it cannot be said that there
was no occasion for the accused to make an extra-judicial
confession. On the other hand, given the situation, this extra-
judicial confession is corroborated by the doctors, who also
found the wound on his tongue, as a result of teeth bite and the
fact of throwing the girl into the River, the recovery of her
clothes on the bank of the River. While explaining, the accused
did not tell about the sexual assault, but that was the only
motive for him to throw away the child.
24
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
25
(iii) PW-3- Mehar Chand, to whom the accused was known,
testified the fact of confession. Both PW-3 Mehar Chand, as well
.
as the accused, were natives of the same place, whereas the
victim was of Nepalese origins. The closeness of the accused
with PW-3 Mehar Chand gets corroboration from the statement
of (PW-6) Ms. Shanu Maya. When accused had reached the
Dhaba of Kumar, then he found (PW-3) Mehar Chand consuming
liquor with Bhuvnesh, and he joined them.
(iv). Another factor, which assumes significance, is that the
victim belonged to Nepal and was a poor girl and although, (PW-
1) Banti Devi mentioned it in her testimony that she had
adopted her. Still, we cannot lose sight of the fact that people
keep girls from a low-income family as domestic maids. Despite
that, (PW-3) Mehar Chand testified those facts which he knew
would go against his local companion Kamal Kumar.
(v) In Jagroop Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 2012 SC 2600,
Hon’ble Supreme Court holds as under:-
“24. The issue that emanates for appreciation is
whether such confessional statement should be given
any credence or thrown overboard. In this context, we
may refer with profit to the authority in Gura Singh v.
State of Rajasthan, 2001(1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 122 :
(2001)2 SCC 205 wherein, after referring to the
decisions in Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Vindhya
25
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
26
Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 322, Maghar Singh v. State of
Punjab, AIR 1975 SC 1320, Narayan Singh v. State of
M.P., AIR 1985 SC 1678, Kishore Chand v. State of H.P.,
.
1990(3) R.C.R (Criminal) 650 : AIR 1990 SC 2140 and
Baldev Raj v. State of Haryana, 1991(1) R.C.R.(Criminal)
75 : AIR 1991 SC 37, it has been opined that it is the
settled position of law that extra judicial confession, if
true and voluntary, can be relied upon by the court to
convict the accused for the commission of the crime
alleged. Despite inherent weakness of extra- judicial
confession as an item of evidence, it cannot be ignored
when shown that such confession was made before a
person who has no reason to state falsely and his
evidence is credible. The evidence in the form of extra-
judicial confession made by the accused before the
witness cannot be always termed to be tainted evidence.
Corroboration of such evidence is required only by way
of abundant caution. If the court believes the witness
before whom the confession is made and is satisfied
that it was true and voluntarily made, then the
conviction can be founded on such evidence alone. The
aspects which have to be taken care of are the nature of
the circumstances, the time when the confession is
made and the credibility of the witnesses who speak for
such a confession. That apart, before relying on the
confession, the court has to be satisfied that it is
voluntary and it is not the result of inducement, threat or
promise as envisaged under Section 24 of the Act or
brought about in suspicious circumstances to
circumvent Sections 25 and 26.
25. Recently, in Sahadevan Another v. State of
Tamil Nadu, 2012(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 899 : 2012(3)
Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 23 : 2012 AIR SCW
3206, after referring to the rulings in Sk. Yusuf v. State
of W.B., 2011(5) R.C.R.(Criminal) 762 : 2011(5) Recent
Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 308 : (2011)11 SCC 754 and
Pancho v. State of Haryana, 2011(4) R.C.R.(Criminal)
665 : 2011(5) Recent Apex Judgments 481 : (2011)10
SCC 165 : AIR 2012 SC 523, a two-Judge Bench has laid
down that the extra-judicial confession is a weak
evidence by itself and it has to be examined by the court
with greater care and caution; that it should be made
voluntarily and should be truthful; that it should inspire
26
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
27
confidence; that an extra-judicial confession attains
greater credibility and evidentiary value if it is supported
by a chain of cogent circumstances and is further
.
corroborated by other prosecution evidence; that for an
extra- judicial confession to be the basis of conviction, it
should not suffer from any material discrepancies and
inherent improbabilities; and that such statement
essentially has to be proved like any other fact and in
accordance with law.”
(I) Recovery of clothes of accused vide recovery memo Ext. PW-
8/A:
(i). The Prosecution has failed to prove such recovery because
there were two independent witnesses while making this
recovery. One was HC Kapil Kumar (PW-8) and the second was
Rohit Kumar. PW-8 was a police witness, and unless an
independent witness corroborates such recovery, it would be
difficult to rely upon it. Needless to say that it is not a recovery
based upon the disclosure statement under Section 27 of the
Indian Evidence Act, but one which viz-a-viz which would fall
under Section 102 of CrPC. As such, it was incumbent upon the
prosecution to examine Rohit Kumar, the sole independent
witness, but for the reasons best known to the Prosecution, he
was not examined. PW-2 Rajni also corroborated the seizure of
articles from the spot.
27
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
28
(j) Injury on the tongue of the accused and his explanation thereof:
.
(i). The fact of the victim having been thrown into the River by the
accused and none else is sure because of the presence of
abrasions on both cheeks of the accused as well as a puncture
wound on his tongue, relating to the time when the victim had
gone missing. The most clinching evidence is the statement of
(PW-3) Mehar Chand. He is a reliable witness, with no axe to
grind against the accused and his testimony remained un-
shattered. He deposed that at around 4.00 p.m., when the
accused had left his company, then he did not tell about any
injury, but at around 5.45 p.m. when the accused met him
again, he had found abrasions on his cheek and blood in his
mouth.
(ii). The statement of (PW-9) Dr. Ram Singh assumes significance.
According to the testimony of this witness, he runs a Clinic at
Patli Kuhal and in the morning hours, at around 10.30 a.m., on
December 16, 2014, the accused had visited his Clinic. On
examination of the accused, he noticed an ulcer of around 2
centimetres on his tongue, covered with blood clot. The accused
gave a history to the doctor that he had a fall on the previous
day. The prosecution had proved one prescription slip by this
28
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
29
doctor, exhibited as PW-9/A. A perusal of the original document
shows that it has four-folds when seen from its reverse portion.
.
This fold will occur when somebody keeps this slip after folding
it in the pocket. This prescription slip was supposed to be with
the accused and not with the doctor himself. Strangely, the
prosecution did not lead any evidence to prove that how and by
which memo and on which date, it was taken into possession.
Therefore, no reliance can be placed on the prescription slip (Ext.
PW-9/A). However, be that as it may, the credibility of the
statement of (PW-9) Dr. Ram Singh, who is again a local,
remains un-impeached that he had examined the accused on
December 16, 2014, at around 10.30 a.m. and had notice
clotted blood in his tongue. The doctor further clarified that
although the accused also stated that he received this injury due
to a fall, but he has not seen any external injury. According to
Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, 23rd Edition, an ‘ulcer’ is defined
as ‘a lesion on the surface of the skin or a mucous surface,
caused by superficial loss of tissue usually with inflammations.’
It is also defined as ‘a wound with superficial loss of tissue from
trauma which would turn into an ulcer if infection occurs.’
(iii). On Dec 17, 2014 at 9.50 p.m., the police had taken the accused
to Civil Hospital Manali, where (PW-7) Dr. Ashok Rana had
29
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
30
examined him and issued MLC Ext. PW-7/B. In his testimony,
(PW-7) Dr. Ashok Rana stated that he had noticed punched out
.
on the left anterior part of the tongue with irregular margins. He
had also seen abrasions on the left and right cheeks, measuring
approximately ¼ centimeters tapering above-downwards.
(iv). After his arrest, on Dec 19, 2014, the Investigating Officer had
also taken the accused to Civil Hospital Manali, where (PW-5) Dr.
Dorje Angrup conducted his medical examination and issue
M.L.C (Ext. PW-5/B). In his testimony, (PW-5) Dr. Dorje Angrup
also stated that he had noticed one injury on the left
anterolateral part of the tongue, which was punched off with an
irregular infected margin. He also saw that the frenulum/ventral
aspect of the tongue near the frenulum was also infected.
(v). Now, cumulative reading of the evidence of the doctors, who had
examined the accused on December 16, 17 and 19, 2014, had
noticed a punctured wound on the tongue of the accused. ASI
Gandhi Ram (PW-17) had also mentioned about two abrasions
on both the cheeks of the accused, tapering downwards. (PW-7)
Dr. Ashok Rana explicitly stated that this injury is also possible if
a person falls on a hard surface and his tongue comes between
the teeth. He further explained that it would also result in
30
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
31
corresponding injuries, which were not noticed by him in the
MLC. Similarly, (PW-5) Dr. Dorje Angrup categorically stated that
.
“the injury found on the tongue of the accused is most likely to
be caused by teeth bite.” He denied that this injury was possible
by fall from a height because there was no corresponding injury.
(vi). The accused in his statement under Section 313 of CrPC., in
answer to question No. 35, admitted that he had stated to the
said doctor that he had a fall on December 15, 2014. Thus, it is
proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Kamal Kumar had
visited the Clinic of (PW-9) Dr. Ram Singh on December 16,
2014, at around 10.30 a.m. to get treatment of wound on his
tongue, which had clotted blood on it and he had received the
injury on the tongue on Dec 15, 2014.
(vii). A perusal of this irrefutable evidence leads to an irresistible
conclusion that the accused had received these injuries on his
tongue due to teeth bite. There is clinching evidence to prove
that the abrasions on his cheeks, pointing out towards
resistance offered by someone. The tell-tale signs on the spot
are alarming and reveal that, below the torso, the victim was
wholly undressed, with her privates exposed. Therefore, no other
inference is possible except that during the process of sexually
31
04/10/2019 20:32:06 :::HCHP
32
assaulting a 14 years young girl, the accused was trying to lick
her by inserting his tongue in her mouth, and the girl was
.
fighting like a lioness. She did not give her consent, inflicted
teeth bite in the tongue of the accused and caused abrasions on
his cheeks. The presence of the blood on the spot, which oozed
out from the tongue of the accused, proves beyond reasonable
doubts that he was the person, who had assaulted the helpless
girl. r
13. Judicial Precedents on the Law of Circumstantial Evidence::
a) In Hanuman Govind Nargundkar v. State of Madhya
Pradesh, AIR 1952 SC 343, a three member bench of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court holds:
10. “…It is well to remember that in cases where the
evidence is of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances
from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should inthe first instance be fully established, and all the facts so
established should be consistent only with the hypothesis
of the guilt of the accused. Again, the circumstancesshould be of a conclusive nature and tendency and they
should be such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one
proposed to be proved. In other words, there must be a
chain of evidence so far complete as not to leave any
reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the
innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show
that within all human probability the act must have been
done by the accused…”
b) In Eradu and Ors. v. State of Hyderabad, AIR 1956 SC 316,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed
32
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
33
10. ..It is a fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence
that circumstantial evidence should point inevitably to the
conclusion that it was the accused and the accused only
.
who were the perpetrators of the offence and such
evidence should be incompatible with the innocence of the
accused.
c) In M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1963 SC 200,
a Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds:
18. …It is a well-established rule in criminal jurisprudence
that circumstantial evidence can be reasonably made the
basis of an accused persons’ conviction if it is of such a
character that it is wholly inconsistent with the innocence
of the accused and is consistent only with his guilt. If, thecircumstances proved in the case are consistent either with
the innocence of the accused or with his guilt, then the
accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt. There is no
doubt or dispute about this position. But in applying this
principle, it is necessary to distinguish between facts whichmay be called primary or basic on the one hand and
inference of facts to be drawn from them on the other. In
regard to the proof of basic or primary facts, the Courts has
to judge the evidence in the ordinary way, and in theappreciation of evidence in respect of the proof of these
basic or primary facts there is no scope for the applicationof the doctrine of benefit of doubt. The Court considers the
evidence and decides whether that evidence proves a
particular fact or not. When it is held that a certain fact isproved; the question arises whether that fact leads to the
inference of guilt of the accused person or not, and in
dealing with this aspect of the problem, the doctrine of
benefit of doubt would apply and an inference of guilt can
be drawn only if the proved fact is wholly inconsistent with
the innocence of the accused and is consistent only with
his guilt…
d) In Gambhir v. State of Maharashtra, (1982) 2 SCC 351, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court holds:
33
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
34
9. …The law regarding circumstantial evidence is well-
settled. When a case rests upon the circumstantial
evidence, such evidence must satisfy three tests : (1) the.
circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to
be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established (2)
those circumstances should be of a definite tendency
unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused; (3) thecircumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so
complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that
within all human probability the crime was committed by
the accused and none else. The circumstantial evidence in
order to sustain conviction must be complete andincapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that
of the guilt of the accused. The circumstantial evidence
should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused
but should be inconsistent with his innocence. In the lightof the legal position about the circumstantial evidence, we
have to examine whether the circumstantial evidence inthe instant case satisfies the requirements of law.
e) In, Sharad Biridhichand Sarda v State of Maharashtra,
(1984) 4 SCC 116, a Three Member Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court holds:
151. It is well settled that the prosecution must stand or
fall on its own legs and it cannot derive any strength from
the weakness of the defence. This is trite law and nodecision has taken a contrary view. What some cases have
held is only this where various links in a chain are in
themselves complete, then a false plea or a false defence
may be called into aid only to lend assurance to the Court.
In other words, before using the additional link it must be
proved that all the links in the chain are complete and do
not suffer from any infirmity. It is not the law that where
there is any infirmity or lacuna in the prosecution case, the
same could be cured or supplied by a false defence or a
plea which is not accepted by a court.
152. Before discussing the cases relied upon by the High
Court we would like to cite a few decisions on the nature,
34
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
35
character and essential proof required in a criminal case
which rests on circumstantial evidence alone. The most
fundamental and basic decision of this Court is Hanumant
.
v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (supra). This case has been
uniformly followed and applied by this Court in a large
number of later decisions up-to-date, for instance, the
cases of Tufail v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (1969) 3 SCC 198
and Ramgopal v State of Maharashtra, AIR 1972 SC 656.
It may be useful to extract what Mahajan, J. has laid down
in Hanumant’s case (supra) :
“It is well to remember that in cases where the evidence is
of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances from which
the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should in the first
instance be fully established and all the facts so
established should be consisent only with the hypothesis of
the guilt of the accused. Again, the circumstances should
be of a conclusive nature and tendency and they should be
such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed
to be proved. In other words, there must be a chain of
evidence so far complete as not to leave any reasonable
ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of
the accused and it must be such as to show that within all
human probability the act must have been done by the
accused.”
153. A close analysis of this decision would show that the
following conditions must be fulfilled before a case against
an accused can be said to be fully established :
(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is
to be drawn should be fully established.
It may be noted here that this Court indicated that the
circumstances concerned ‘must or should’ and not ‘may be’
established. There is not only a grammatical but a legal
distinction between ‘may be proved’ and ‘must be or
should be proved’ as was held by this Court in Shivaji
Sahebrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra, (1973) 2 SCC
793 where the following observations were made :
“certainly, it is a primary principle that the accused must
be and not merely may be guilty before a Court can convict
35
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
36
and the mental distance between ‘may be’ and ‘must be’ is
long and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions.”
(2) the facts so established should be consistent only with
.
the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say,
they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis
except that the accused is guilty.
(3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and
tendency.
(4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except
the one to be proved, and
(5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not
to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion
consistent with the innocence of the accused and must
show that in all human probability the act must have been
done by the accused.
154. These five golden principles, if we may say so,
constitute the panchsheel of the proof of a case based on
circumstantial evidence.
f) In Kishore Chand v State of Himachal Pradesh, (1991) 1
SCC 286, the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds
5. “In assessing the evidence imaginary possibilities have
no role to play. What is to be considered are ordinary
human probabilities. In other words when there is no direct
witness to the commission of murder and the case rests
entirely on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances
relied on must be fully established…”
g) In Vasa Chandrasekhar Rao v. Ponna Satyanarayana
Anr. (2000) 6 SCC 286, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed:
7. …Where the prosecution wants to prove the guilt of the
accused by circumstantial evidence, it is necessary to
establish that the circumstances from which a conclusion36
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
37is drawn, should be fully proved; the circumstances should
be conclusive in nature; all the facts so established, should
be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt and.
inconsistent with the innocence; and the circumstances
should exclude the possibility of guilt of any person other
than the accused. In order to justify an inference of guilt,
the circumstances from which such an inference is soughtto be drawn, must be incompatible with the innocence of
the accused. The cumulative effect of the circumstances
must be such as to negate the innocence of the accused
and to bring home the offence beyond any reasonable
doubt. Where accused on being asked, offers noexplanation or the explanation offered is found to be false,
then that itself forms an additional link in the chain of
circumstances to point out the guilt.
h) In B. Venkat Swamy v. Vijaya Nehru, (2008) 10 SCC 260, a
Three Member Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed:
19. “…13. Sir Alfred Wills in his admirable book “Wills’
Circumstantial Evidence” (Chapter VI) lays down the
following rules specially to be observed in the case of
circumstantial evidence:(1) the facts alleged as the basisof any legal inference must be clearly proved and beyond
reasonable doubt connected with the factum probandum;
(2) the burden of proof is always on the party who asserts
the existence of any fact, which infers legal accountability;
(3) in all cases, whether of direct or circumstantialevidence the best evidence must be adduced which the
nature of the case admits; (4) in order to justify the
inference of guilt, the inculpatory facts must be
incompatible with the innocence of the accused and
incapable of explanation, upon any other reasonable
hypothesis than that of his guilt, (5) if there be any
reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused, he is entitled
as of right to be acquitted”.
(i) Placing reliance upon the Principles of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hanumant Govind Nargundkar
37
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
38and anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh,AIR 1952 SC 343, the
Bench holds,
.
14. There is no doubt that conviction can be based solely
on circumstantial evidence but it should be tested by thetouch- stone of law relating to circumstantial evidence laid
down by the this Court as far back as in 1952.
SUM UP:
14. From the summary of law relating to Circumstantial Evidence,
the following fundamental principles emerge:
(i) CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD BE FULLY ESTABLISHED:
The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be
drawn should be fully established. (Sharad, (1984) 4 SCC 116).
In assessing the evidence imaginary possibilities have no role to
play. What is to be considered are ordinary human probabilities.
In other words when there is no direct witness to the
commission of murder and the case rests entirely on
circumstantial evidence, the circumstances relied on must be
fully established. (Kishore, (1991) 1 SCC 286).
(ii) CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD BE CONSISTENT:
The circumstantial evidence should not only be consistent with
the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his
innocence. (Gambhir, 1982 (2) SCC 351). It is a well-established
rule in criminal jurisprudence that circumstantial evidence can
38
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
39be reasonably made the basis of an accused persons’ conviction
if it is of such a character that it is wholly inconsistent with the
.
innocence of the accused and is consistent only with his guilt. If,
the circumstances proved in the case are consistent either with
the innocence of the accused or with his guilt, then the accused
is entitled to the benefit of doubt. (M.G. Agarwal, AIR 1963 SC
200).
(iii) CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD BE CONCLUSIVE:
The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and
tendency. (Sharad, (1984) 4 SCC 116). It is a fundamental
principle of criminal jurisprudence that circumstantial evidence
should point inevitably to the conclusion that it was the accused
and the accused only who were the perpetrators of the offence
and such evidence should be incompatible with the innocence
of the accused. (Eradu, AIR 1956 SC 316).
(iv) CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD BE OF DEFINITE TENDENCY:
Circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly
pointing towards guilt of the accused. (Gambhir, (1982) 2 SCC
351).
(v) NO OTHER HYPOTHESIS EXCEPT ONE TO BE PROVED:
The facts so established should be consistent only with the
hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should
39
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
40not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the
accused is guilty. (Sharad, (1984) 4 SCC 116). The
.
circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be
complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis
than that of the guilt of the accused. (Gambhir, (1982) 2 SCC
351). They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the
one to be proved. (Sharad, (1984) 4 SCC 116).
(vi) CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF GUILT NOT INNOCENCE:
In order to justify an inference of guilt, the circumstances from
which such an inference is sought to be drawn, must be
incompatible with the innocence of the accused. The cumulative
effect of the circumstances must be such as to negate the
innocence of the accused and to bring home the offence beyond
any reasonable doubt. (Vasa Chandrasekhar, (2000) 6 SCC
286).
(vii) CHAIN OF CIRCUMSTANCES MUST BE COMPLETE:
Circumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so
complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that
within all human probability the crime was committed by the
accused and none else. (Gambhir, (1982) 2 SCC 351).
(viii) FALSE DEFENCE AS AN ADDITIONAL LINK ONLY WHEN ALL
CIRCUMSTANCES ARE ESTABLISHED:
40
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
41
Where accused on being asked, offers no explanation or the
explanation offered is found to be false, then that itself forms an
.
additional link in the chain of circumstances to point out the
guilt. (Vasa Chandrasekhar, (2000) 6 SCC 286). It is well settled
that the prosecution must stand or fall on its own legs and it
cannot derive any strength from the weakness of the defence.
This is trite law and no decision has taken a contrary view. What
some cases have held is only this that where various links in a
chain are in themselves complete, then a false plea or a false
defence may be called into aid only to lend assurance to the
Court. In other words, before using the additional link it must be
proved that all the links in the chain are complete and do not
suffer from any infirmity. It is not the law that where there is any
infirmity or lacuna in the prosecution case, the same could be
cured or supplied by a false defence or a plea which is not
accepted by a court. (Sharad, (1984) 4 SCC 116).
15. These circumstances, on its own, make an unbroken
chain of evidence pointing out towards the guilt of the accused. Apart
from this, the Prosecution has relied upon the evidence of extra-
judicial confession, which, even if ignored, would not change the
outcome of this case. Resultantly, the prosecution has proved that it
was the accused, who undressed the young girl to commit sexual
41
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
42
intercourse with her, and then intending to screen the evidence,
threw her in the River Beas. The non-recovery of her dead body is not
.
necessary to prove her death.
16. Learned Counsel for the accused argued that the link
evidence is missing and the prosecution had failed to prove that the
samples of hair and blood remained un-tampered before they were
tested in the Laboratory.
17.
This submission has no force. Firstly, because the police
had recovered hair, immediately on reaching the spot, and there was
no possibility of police planting the hair of the accused. At that time,
the accused was not even a suspect. The recovery memo Ext. PW-
1/A, signed by Banti Devi, contains this fact. Undoubtedly, the
Prosecution did not examine Sheetal, but in their testimonies, both
Banti Devi (PW-1), and her daughter PW-2 Rajni, corroborate the
recovery. They had no enmity with the accused, and there was no
reason to concoct evidence to frame him. Her cross-examination
failed to impeach her credibility. The Investigating Officer (PW-17)
ASI Gandhi Ram testified about the recovery of blood and hair from
the place. The defence could not cast any dent to doubt this
recovery.
42
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
43
18. The Investigating Officer, PW-17 Gandhi Ram collected the
evidence and sealed the same. He handed over it to PW-13 Head
.
Constable Vivek Kumar, who was on duty as MHC in Police Station,
Manali on December 16, 2014. The prosecution examined (PW-16)
Head Constable Bal Krishan, who was the officiating MHC on
December 20, 2014, on account of the leave of MHC Vivek and on
that day, he had handed over the case property along with Road
Certificate to (PW-4) Head Constable Lal Singh to deposit the same in
RFSL, Mandi. The prosecution had examined PW-4 Head Constable
Lal Singh to prove that he had taken the samples to the laboratory on
December 20, 2014, after receiving the same from MHC Bal Krishan
and on the same day, he had deposited the same in the laboratory.
19. Regarding link evidence, the report of the laboratory,
which is per se admissible under Section 293 of Cr.P.C., reveals that
it had received the samples on December 20, 2014, and seals on the
parcels were intact. They had tallied with specimen seals sent with
the docket. Therefore, the link evidence is complete. The
prosecution has proved that the case property remained un-
tampered.
20. On what basis, the Investigators and the prosecution
concluded that it was an attempt to rape, is beyond any
43
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
44
comprehension. They relied upon the inadmissible portion of the
disclosure statement of the accused made by him on December 16,
.
2014 (Ext. PW-3/A), wherein he had stated that he could point out
the spot near the River Beas, where on December 15, 2014, at about
4.30 p.m., he had found the victim alone cutting fuelwood and then
tried to commit evil act with her and after that threw her in the River.
This statement does not lead to the discovery of any fact, as such,
would not fall under the exception to the Recoveries, under Section
27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. On its plain reading, it is hit by
Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act and could not be proved.
21. Any person accused of such a heinous offence would not
necessarily tell that he was able to complete the sexual act. The
accused successfully mislead the Investigation by camouflaging his
ghastly deed. The accused later on denied everything. Had he been
charged under Section 201, 376 of IPC and POCSO, the sentence
would have been proportionate to the crime. There was no reason for
this pervert to spare this small girl without satisfying his lust to the
fullest. There was nobody to save her. Section 375 IPC, states that
even the slightest penetration amounts to rape. Her dead body could
never be recovered to reveal how much trauma she had to undergo.
The motive of the offence was sex, and the purpose of pushing her in
the River was undeniable to destroy the evidence. Undoubtedly, the
44
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
45
burden is on the prosecution to prove every allegation. Still, under
Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, the burden shifts on the
.
accused, when the initial burden is discharged by the prosecution,
and to prove the facts which were especially within the knowledge of
the accused.
22. The law is no more res Integra that an accused cannot
be convicted for an offence higher than for what he was charged. The
trial Court framed charges, for the offences punishable under
Sections 302 and 376 read with Section 511 of IPC, because the
police had filed the report under Section 173 (2) of CrPC, claiming
prosecution only for the commission of these offences. Nobody
bothered to invoke the provisions of the POCSO Act as well as to
frame charges under Section 201 and 376 of IPC. The State-
respondent must keep this aspect in mind while considering
remissions to the accused.
23. Resultantly, the prosecution has proved that it was the
accused, who threw her in River Beas. The non-recovery of her dead
body is not fatal to prove her fatal end.
CONCLUSION:
24. Given the analysis of the evidence and application of the
law, the prosecution has proved its case beyond any reasonable
45
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP
46
doubt. The evidence proved on the record is sufficient to conclude
guilt and the chain of circumstances is complete. There is no error in
.
the reasoning of the Trial Court, and there is no occasion for this
Court to take a view contrary to the one taken in the impugned
judgment. The Trial Court, in our considered opinion, has correctly
and accurately appreciated the evidence. Accordingly, the judgment
passed by the Trial Court is affirmed, the appeal fails, and it is,
therefore, dismissed. Registry to return the records to the Trial Court.
(Tarlok Chauhan)
Judge
(Anoop Chitkara)
October 4, 2019. Judge
(hemlata)
46
04/10/2019 20:32:07 :::HCHP