SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
10th July, 1957.
B.P. SINHA, S. JAFER IMAM AND J.L. KAPUR, JJ.
Prakash Chandra Pathak, Appellant
Versus
State of U.P., Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 110 of 1957.
Advocates appeared
M/s. H. J. Umrigar, Janardhan Sharma, and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for Appellant; M/s. G. C. Mathur and C. P. Lal, Advocates, for Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 949 of 1956, D/- 1-11-1956-Allahabad
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - CONVICTION - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - SUFFICIENCY - POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY - EXPLANATION - BURDEN OF PROOF.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted of murdering his mother and infant son. The prosecution's case was that the appellant, who was in urgent need of money, killed his mother and son in a fit of rage after she refused to give him any more money. The appellant denied the charges and claimed that he had left his home before the murders took place.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the circumstantial evidence against the appellant was overwhelming. The appellant was in urgent need of money, he had a motive for killing his mother and son, he had the opportunity to commit the crimes, and he was found in possession of the stolen property shortly after the murders took place. The court also rejected the appellant's explanation for his possession of the stolen property.
Issues: 1. Whether the circumstantial evidence against the appellant was sufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the appellant's explanation for his possession of the stolen property was credible.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the circumstantial evidence against the appellant was overwhelming and that his explanation for his possession of the stolen property was not credible. The court found that the appellant had a motive for killing his mother and son, he had the opportunity to commit the crimes, and he was found in possession of the stolen property shortly after the murders took place. The court also found that the appellant's explanation for his possession of the stolen property was not credible.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the appellant's conviction.
Judgment
SINHA, J. : This appeal by special leave is directed against the concurrent judgments and orders of the courts below convicting the appellant for the double murder of his mother Mst. Reoti Devi, aged about 65 years, and his infant son Sudhir, aged about 4 1/2 years, and sentencing him to death under S. 302, Indian Penal Code. There is also a conviction under S. 380 of the Indian Penal Code for the theft of his mother s jewelry and a sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment thereunder.
2. The facts of the case lie within a narrow compass and have been stated in great detail in the judgments below. It is only necessary to state for the purposes of this appeal that the appellant is the youngest of the three sons of a retired Deputy Collector who was so dissatisfied with his extravagant living that in his life-time he gave away the bulk of his valuable properties to his wife and his two elder sons, as also to the aforesaid infant son, Sudhir, of the appellant, thus excluding him from his patrimony. After his father s death, the mother appears to have had a great weakness for her erring son and in spite of the fact that he used to pester her with his continual demands for money, she used to stay in that portion of the family house which was occupied by the appellant and his family, the other part of the house being occupied by the eldest brother Harish Chander P. W. 22. The two portions of the family house appear to have a common separating wall with rooms on either side and a communicating door which used to be locked on both sides. In order to continue his riotous living, the appellant appears to have been extorting money from his mother by cajolery or threats. On the evening of the date of the occurrence leading upto the trial and conviction of the appellant, the appellant appears to have made his last demand for money from his mother who was either unable or unwilling to accommodate him, with the result that, as is the prosecution case, some time between 9 and 10 p. m., while his mother was lying on one cot and his infant son was sleeping on another cot, the appellant so much lost his head over his mother s refusal any more to part with her money and jewelry that he battered his mother and son aforesaid to death and decamped with all her jewellery on which he could lay his hands. He was so much in a hurry to leave the town of Meerut where the family used to reside that he made an unsuccessful attempt to catch the bus at the Harpur Motor Stand, and failing to get the bus, he hastened on to the railway station and left for Moradabad by rail. Early next morning, the diabolical crime of double murder was discovered by the family maidservant who informed the appellant s eldest brother Harish Chander who got into touch with the police on the phone. The police alerted the police of various towns to look for the appellant who was suspected to be the culprit, and the appellant was arrested at about-9-45 a. m., the next morning - August 2, 1955, at a certain restaurant in Moradabad. After the arrest, the police made a thorough search of the appellant s person, and jewellery, subsequently identified and admitted by the appellant himself to be his mother s property (Exhibits III to VIII) was found on his possession. The police also discovered the evidence that the appellant had been attempting to sell the stolen jewellery early in the morning of August 2, 1955, at about 7 a. m., through Rup Kishore (P. W. 8) who runs a tea stall, on the representation that his mother had died and he wanted to sell the jewellery in order to pay off his debts.
3. It is convenient here to state the circumstances in which the appellant found himself in urgent need of money and his movements in the evening just before his departure at about 10 p. m., according to the prosecution and at about 8-45 p. m. according to the appellant himself, on the night of 1-8-1955, on which date the occurrence took place. Mahendra Singh P. W. 21, who is the manager of a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.