2023 Supreme(SC) 684

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA, JJ.
Wazir Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1922-1923 of 2017
Decided On : 02-08-2023

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Burden of proof – Prosecution cannot take recourse of Section 106 of Evidence Act, 1872 without laying any foundational facts.
(2) When an incriminating circumstance is put to accused and accused either offers no explanation or offers an explanation which is found to be untrue, then same becomes an additional link in chain of circumstances to make it complete.
(3) Law does not enjoin a duty on prosecution to lead evidence of such character which is almost impossible or extremely difficult to be led – Duty on prosecution is to lead such evidence which it is capable of leading, having regard to facts and circumstances of case.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 106 – Burden of proof – Burden is on prosecution to prove guilt of appellant beyond reasonable doubt – If prosecution fails to discharge its initial burden beyond reasonable doubt, appellant has to be acquitted – Prosecution cannot take recourse of Section 106 of Act, 1872 without laying any foundational facts. (Para 17)

(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302 and 201 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 106 – Murder of wife and disappearance of evidence – Circumstantial evidence – Reversal of acquittal by High Court – Marital relations of appellant with the deceased were strained – There is nothing on record to indicate that appellant had suffered any injuries – Defence put forward by appellant could be termed as false defence – Weapon of offence was recovered from place of incident itself – Foundational facts laid by prosecution are sufficient to invoke Section 106 of Act, 1872 – In a case based on circumstantial evidence where no eye witness is available, there is another principle of law which must be kept in mind – When an incriminating circumstance is put to accused and accused either offers no explanation or offers an explanation which is found to be untrue, then same becomes an additional link in chain of circumstances to make it complete – When attention of convict appellant was drawn to incriminating circumstances that inculpated him in crime, he failed to offer appropriate explanation or gave a false answer – Same can be counted as providing a missing link for completing chain of circumstances. (Paras 16, 17, 23 and 24)

(C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302 and 201 – Murder of wife and disappearance of evidence – Circumstantial evidence – Reversal of acquittal by High Court – If accused does not dispute his presence at home at relevant time and does not offer any explanation how wife received injuries or offers explanation which is found to be false, it is a strong circumstance which indicates that he is responsible for commission of crime – In such circumstances where assailants have all opportunity to plan and commit offence at the time and in the circumstances of their choice, it will be extremely difficult for prosecution to lead evidence to establish guilt of accused, if strict principle of circumstantial evidence is insisted upon by Courts – No member of family, even if he is a witness of crime, would come forward to depose against another family member – Law does not enjoin a duty on prosecution to lead evidence of such character which is almost impossible or extremely difficult to be led – Duty on prosecution is to lead such evidence which it is capable of leading, having regard to facts and circumstances of case – Impugned judgment and order passed by High Court affirmed. (Paras 25, 28, 29 and 30)

Facts of the case:

These appeals are at instance of appellant/convict and is directed against judgment(s) and order(s) dated 25.07.2017 (conviction) and 09.08.2017 (sentence) passed by High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Government Appeal No. 10 of 2011, by which High Court allowed appeal filed by respondent State of Uttarakhand and thereby reversed judgment and order of acquittal passed by trial court.

Findings of Court:

Cases are frequently coming before Courts where husbands, due to strained marital relations and doubt as regards character, have gone to extent of killing wife. These crimes are generally committed in complete secrecy inside house and it becomes very difficult for prosecution to lead evidence.

Result : Appeals dismissed.