IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K. SURESH REDDY, K. SREENIVASA REDDY, JJ.
Syam Dondiya – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 70 of 2017
Decided On : 09-08-2024
Criminal Law - Murder - IPC Sections 302, 201 - The court discussed the evidentiary standards for conviction under Section 302 IPC, emphasizing the need for reliable eyewitness testimony and the cautious approach required for extrajudicial confessions, ultimately leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was accused of murdering the deceased over a dispute regarding cattle grazing. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony and an extrajudicial confession, while the defense argued the lack of credible evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the eyewitness testimony unreliable and the extrajudicial confession improbable, leading to reasonable doubt regarding the accused's guilt.
Issues: Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that extrajudicial confessions are weak evidence and require corroboration, and the absence of reliable eyewitnesses led to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish guilt.
Result: The appeal is allowed, and the accused is acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC.
JUDGMENT :
K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal by the appellant-sole accused is directed against the judgment, dated 26.04.2016, in Sessions Case No. 73 of 2015 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam at Sompeta whereby the appellant was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and accordingly he was convicted of the said offence and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months. The learned Sessions Judge found the appellant/accused not guilty of the charge under Section 201 IPC and accordingly acquitted him of the said charge.
2. The substance of the charges framed against the appellant/sole accused are that on 31.11.2011 at about 4.00 PM at Badagam village, Kanchili mandal, he did commit murder of Udaya Gowd @ Ujwal Gowd (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the deceased’) by chopping neck and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, and having knowledge that the accused committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, the accused caused certain evidence of the offence to disappear with an intention of screening the body of the deceased, dug out a pit and buried the dead body, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 201 IPC.
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:
On 01.12.2013, PW-14-Sub Inspector of Police, Kanchili police station received statement of the accused from PW-1 along with Ex.P2-report, and basing on the same, registered a case in crime No. 135 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 IPC under Ex.P16- FIR. PW-15-Inspector of Police, Sompeta Circle took up investigation, sent requisition to the Tahsildar to depute V.R.Os. to act as med
Aloke Nath Dutta v. State of West Bengal
Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab
Mohd. Azad v. State of West Bengal
Mulk Raj v. State of U.P. AIR 1959 SC 902
Munna Kumar Upadhyay v. State of A.P. (2012) 6 SCC 174 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 42
Pakkirisamy v. State of Tamil Nadu
Rameshbhai Chandubhai Rathod v. State of Gujarat
Shiva Karam Payaswami Tewari v. State of Maharashtra
State of Rajasthan v. Raja Ram
Sansar Chand v. State of Rajasthan
Extrajudicial confessions require corroboration and cannot solely establish guilt without reliable evidence.
Extrajudicial confessions are weak evidence and require corroboration; reliance on them must be cautious and supported by credible evidence.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, and extrajudicial confessions require corroboration to be credible.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, and extrajudicial confessions require corroboration to be reliable.
(1) Extra-judicial confession – Extra-judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence – If extra-judicial confession suffers from material discrepancies or inherent improbabilities and does not appea....
Extra-judicial confessions, even without prior acquaintance, can be credible if made immediately post-offence, supporting murder convictions.
The prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, as primarily relied upon uncorroborated extra-judicial confessions and inconsistent witness testimonies.
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.