2012 Supreme(SC) 475

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(K. S. RADHAKRISHNAN & DIPAK MISRA, JJ.)
JAGROOP SINGH - Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 2008
Decided on 20-07-2012.

IMPORTANT POINTS
1. Minor contradictions, inconsistencies, embellishments or improvements which do not affect the core of the prosecution case should not be made a ground to reject the evidence of the witness in entirety.
2. When the attention of the accused is drawn to such circumstances that inculpated him in the crime and he fails to offer appropriate explanation or gives a false answer, the same can be counted as providing a missing link for completing the chain of circumstances.
3. Where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person and further the circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code 1860-Section 302 read with Section 34 and 201 -Prosecution of appellant along with one another for causing death of deceased by assaulting him with a spade-Conviction by Trial Court-Appeal-Dismissed by High Court-Appeal- Deceased was last seen with the accused persons- Omissions and improvements in evidence of prosecution witnesses not such as to create any dent in the prosecution story-Accused had made extra-judicial confessions admitting the guilt- Said confessional statement inspired confidence as the same was totally voluntary and by no means tainted- Dead body of deceased was recovered from field of father of accused - Weapon used in the crime was recovered on the basis of the disclosure statement made by accused - Doctor conducting post mortem opined that injuries found on body of deceased could be caused by the seized weapon- No infirmity found in the judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by Courts below-Appeal dismissed (Paras 26 to 32)

        Circumstantial Evidence-Circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully proved and those circumstances must be conclusive in nature to connect the accused with the crime- All the links in the chain of events must be established beyond reasonable doubt and the established circumstances should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence- In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the Court has to be on its guard to avoid the danger of allowing suspicion to take the place of legal proof and has to be watchful to avoid the danger of being swayed by emotional considerations, however strong they may be, to take the place of proof (Para 15)

        Extra Judicial Confession-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 (Para 24)

       Facts of the Case :

        Appellant along with one another was prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of deceased by assaulting him with a spade. Trial Court convicted accused persons for said offence.Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.

        B.Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

        No infirmity was found in the judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by Courts below. Appeal was dismissed.

       Result : Appeal dismissed