1. Double murder — Conviction under Section 302 IPC — Acquittal by High Court — Appeal against acquittal based on circumstantial evidence. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 599
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. SHAH, B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
Malti Sahu - Appellant
Versus
Rahul & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 471 of 2022
With
State of U.T., Chandigarh - Appellant
Versus
Rahul - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 472 of 2022
Decided On : 11-07-2022
Important Points
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of proving motive and establishing link evidence in cases based on circumstantial evidence, which influenced the court's decision to restore the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court.
Subject
Criminal Law - Murder
Act Referred
Headnote
Circumstantial Evidence - Murder - Section 302 IPC - [Motive, Recovery of Weapon and Loi, Accused's Injury] - The court discussed the evidence of motive, recovery of the weapon and Loi, and the accused's unexplained injury. It highlighted the prosecution's success in proving the motive and establishing the link evidence, leading to the restoration of the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was acquitted by the High Court based on circumstantial evidence, as the prosecution failed to prove the complete chain of circumstances. The original complainant and the State appealed against the acquittal.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court's acquittal was quashed and set aside, and the accused was convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC, as the prosecution successfully proved the motive and established the link evidence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the prosecution had proved the necessary link in the evidence to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt based on circumstantial evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had successfully proved the motive and established the link evidence, including the recovery of the weapon and Loi, and the accused's unexplained injury, leading to the restoration of the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court.
Final Decision: The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court acquitting the accused was quashed and set aside, and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court convicting the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC was restored. The respondent - accused was directed to surrender to undergo the sentence imposed by the Trial Court.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Neeraj Kr. Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Jain, Adv. Mr. Umang Shankar, AOR Mr. Sarad Kr. Singhania, Adv. Mr. G.S. Makker, AOR Mr. Jasmeet Singh, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Aditya Dhawan, Adv. Ms. Kiran Dhawan, Adv. Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR
For the Appellant : Mr. Neeraj Kr. Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Jain, Adv. Mr. Umang Shankar, AOR Mr. Sarad Kr. Singhania, Adv. Mr. G.S. Makker, AOR Mr. Jasmeet Singh, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Aditya Dhawan, Adv. Ms. Kiran Dhawan, Adv. Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR
Table of Contents
2. Appellants contend motive, weapon recovery, and unexplained injuries prove guilt — Respondent argues circumstantial chain is incomplete and key witness turned hostile. (Para 3 , 4 )
3. The court found the motive established, the murder weapon linked to the accused, blood-stained clothing matching both parties, and an unexplained injury on the accused. (Para 7 , 8 )
4. Evidence of a hostile witness can be considered to the extent it supports the prosecution's case in establishing a chain of circumstantial evidence. (Para 7 )
5. High Court's acquittal quashed — Trial Court's conviction and sentence under Section 302 IPC restored. (Para 9 )
6. Can the testimony of a hostile witness be used to support the prosecution's case?
Yes, as per the settled position of law, the evidence of a hostile witness can be considered to the extent that it supports the case of the prosecution. (Para 7 )
7. What factors constitute a complete chain of circumstantial evidence in a murder trial?
A complete chain may include established motive, recovery of the murder weapon linked to the accused, forensic evidence matching the accused and victim, and unexplained injuries on the accused. (Para 7 )
JUDGMENT :
M.R. Shah, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in CRAD No. 635 of 2014 by which the High Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by the respondent – accused – Rahul and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court convicting the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC for committing the murder of one Kavita Sahu and Gaurang Sahu, the State as well as the original complainant/informant – mother of the deceased have preferred the present appeals.
2. On the statement of one Malti Devi, which got recorded on 16.12.2011, in which she stated that she and her husband were Teachers by profession. That her husband was posted at Mewat, Haryana and she was posted in Sector-17, Panchkula. They had two children, i.e., elder daughter Kavita, about 17 years of age, who was the student of Guru Nanak Public School, Sector-36, Chandigarh, whereas her younger son Gaurang Sahu was the student of Govt. Model Senior Secondary School, Sector-37, Chandigarh. On that day, she had left the home at 8.30 A.M. for duty and both the children were at home, it being their holiday. On her return at about 3.00 P.M., she found her daughter in a pool of blood with a cut on her neck and when she went upstairs, she found her son also in a pool of blood and his neck also had a cut. All the articles in the room were lying scattered.
2.1 On the said statement / complaint, the case was registered and initially the investigation was carried out by the local police station. Special reports were sent and investigation was commenced. The Investigating Officer collected the incriminating material from the spot. They were converted into parcels and sealed with seal of “CS”. The dead bodies were sent to the General Hospital, Sector – 16, Chandigarh for post-mortem examination. During the course of the investigation, the statements of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded including the statement of PW–8, Sidharth Vashisht, who, at the relevant time, disclosed that he had seen the accused Rahul alongwith Kavita and Gaurang coming from the side of Shivalik Public School on foot going towards their locality wearing a blue colour sweater and while returning, he (Rahul) was not wearing the said blue colour sweater and rather, he had covered himself with a brown coloured shawl or Loi.
2.2 On the basis of the statement made by PW–8, Sidharth Vashisht, the police started to search for the culprit-Rahul. Later the case was transferred to the Crime Branch (SIT), Chandigarh and the investigation was commenced by Inspector Amanjot Singh. During the investigation, the sealed parcels were sent to CFSL, Sector 36, Chandigarh. As noted hereinabove, Rahul was suspected of commission of offence on the basis of statement of PW–8, Sidharth Vashisht and therefore, a search was launched for him. He was found missing from his house. He was later arrested on 17.01.2012 from Village Saha, District Ambala and produced in the Court.
2.3 On the basis of his disclosure statement, under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, a bag containing blood-stained clothes was recovered. That during the course of the investigation, one sweater was recovered from the crime scene and the said sweater was sent to CFSL. One blood-stained Loi and the clothes were recovered from the black bag, which was recovered on the basis of disclosure statement made by the accused. The Investigating Officer also recorded the statements of other witnesses and during the course of investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of PW-20, Dr. Davinder Kapil from whom the accused took the first aid in respect of the injury sustained by him on the ring finger of his left hand. On the basis of the disclosure statement made by the accused, the statement of PW-9, a shopkeeper was recorded and according to
