Back
J. B. PARDIWALA, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Anand Jakkappa Pujari @Gaddadar – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
What is the test and sufficiency of circumstantial evidence required to convict on last-seen-with-the-deceased in a murder case? What is the admissibility and limits of Section 27 Indian Evidence Act discovery statements (including joint disclosures) in establishing linked facts? What are the appellate court’s findings on whether the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt given the last-seen and discovery evidence?
Key Points: - The judgment emphasizes that last seen together alone is not sufficient for conviction and requires corroboration. (!) (!) - It discusses the proper scope and strict construction of Section 27 Evidence Act, including issues with discovery statements and joint disclosures, and the need for facts discovered to relate distinctly to the discovered fact. (!) (!) (!) (!) - The High Court’s findings included reliance on DNA for identity, cause of death uncertainties, and recoveries from the accused, but the Supreme Court acquitted the appellants, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
JUDGMENT
J.B. PARDIWALA, J.
For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts:-
| INDEX | |
| I. | CASE OF THE PROSECUTION |
| II. | IMPUGNED JUDGMENT |
| III. | SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF APPELLANTS |
| IV. | SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT |
| V. | ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION |
| VI. | ANALYSIS |
| A. Last seen together with the deceased | |
| B.Discovery at the instance of the accused-appellants | |
| VII. | CONCLUSION |
1. Leave granted in SLP (Crl.) No. 15426 of 2025.
2. Since the issues raised in both the captioned appeals are the same, the appellants are co-convicts and the challenge is also to the self-same judgment and order passed by the High Court, those were taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
3. These appeals arise from the common judgment and order passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad dated 22.12.2021 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 100096 and 100109 of 2018, respectively (hereinafter, “the impugned judgment”), by which the High Court dismissed the appeals preferred by the appellants herein and thereby affirmed the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court in
(1) Circumstantial evidence – Circumstance of “last seen together” does not by itself and necessarily lead to inference that it was accused who committed crime.(2) Disclosure Statement – Information....
The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, requiring all circumstantial evidence to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
Murder Charge - When a murder charge is to be proved solely on circumstantial evidence, as in this case, presumption of innocence of the accused must have a dominant role.
Criminal Law - Criminal Trial - Injuries/Wounds/Weapons - Appeal against conviction - Injuries sustained by two deceased women have direct nexus with weapons of offence as recovered by police on basi....
(1) Appeal by Special Leave – If finding of guilt is returned without properly evaluating and testing evidence by applying requisite legal principles, it can always be corrected by Supreme Court in e....
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt if it forms a complete chain pointing to the accused, even without direct evidence.
When both the courts below recorded concurrent finding of facts, Supreme Court therefore should focus its analysis on the legal aspects emanating from the concurrent findings so recorded. It should n....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
