Back
1999 Supreme(Pat) 625
PATNA HIGH COURT
P.K.Deb and D.P.S.Choudhary JJ.
Tuni Marandi
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Application No. 394 of 1990 ;
Decided On : JULY 22, 1999
Extrajudicial confessions, recovery of weapons, and evidence of motive can be used to prove guilt in a murder case based on circumstantial evidence.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - SECTION 302 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE - EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION - RECOVERY OF WEAPON - MOTIVE - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.
Fact of the Case:
The accused-appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing fatal injuries to the deceased, Matal Marandi, with a Tangi (a sharp-cutting weapon). The prosecution's case was based on circumstantial evidence, including extrajudicial confessions made by the accused-appellant before villagers and the police, the recovery of the murder weapon from the accused-appellant's house, and evidence of a previous incident where the deceased had chastised the accused-appellant for drinking excessively.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused-appellant had committed the murder. The court relied on the extrajudicial confessions made by the accused-appellant, which were corroborated by multiple witnesses, as well as the recovery of the murder weapon from the accused-appellant's house. The court also found that the evidence of the previous incident between the accused-appellant and the deceased provided a motive for the murder.
Issues: 1. Whether the extrajudicial confessions made by the accused-appellant were admissible in evidence. 2. Whether the recovery of the murder weapon from the accused-appellant's house was admissible in evidence. 3. Whether the evidence of the previous incident between the accused-appellant and the deceased was admissible in evidence. 4. Whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused-appellant had committed the murder.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the extrajudicial confessions made by the accused-appellant were admissible in evidence as they were made voluntarily and without any coercion or inducement. 2. The court held that the recovery of the murder weapon from the accused-appellant's house was admissible in evidence as it was made in pursuance of a statement made by the accused-appellant to the police, which was admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. 3. The court held that the evidence of the previous incident between the accused-appellant and the deceased was admissible in evidence as it provided a motive for the murder. 4. The court held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused-appellant had committed the murder based on the extrajudicial confessions, the recovery of the murder weapon, and the evidence of the previous incident.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant.
P.K.Deb and D.P.S.Choudhary JJ.
1. This appeal has been preferred by the above-mentioned accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 27-8-1990 passed by the then 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in Sessions Case No. 325 of 1987 convicting the accused-appellant under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him rigorous imprisonment for life. When the appeal was preferred before this Court vide order dated 15-11-1990 a Division Bench of this Court has appointed Shri Viveka Nand Jha as an arguing Counsel for and on behalf of the accused-appellant.
2. The deceased in the present case is Matal Marandi who happened to be the cousin of the accused-appellant Tuni Marandi. The prosecution case is that the accused-appellant Tuni Marandi was a habitual drunkard and on being cousin, the deceased Matal Marandi used to caution him not to take more wine and while chastising he was reminding of the death of the elder brother of the accused-appellant on the same cause of consumption of excess liquor. On the previous date of occurrence when again the deceased cautioned the accused-appellant while he was taking wine in a nearby house belonging to one blind woman then the accused appellant became enraged and threatened the deceased of dire consequences. The accused and the deceased were closed neighbours. In the morning of 28-4-1987 at about 5 a.m. the Matal Marandi was found lying unconscious having several injuries on his person on the back side of house. It was detected by his son Fudo Marandi (P.W. 5). He found injuries on his temporal region and below his left eye and that the injured was not in a position to speak. The informant then called the neighbouring persons and as there was previous incident of chastising it was informed that the accused have hands in injuring Matal Marandi. The witnesses then called the village Chowkidar (P.W. 4) Latru Roy who came to the spot and found the injured lying unconscious condition and then went to the house of the accused where the accused was found to be hiding himself on the corner of the room. He was brought out by the village Chowkidar and on being asked as to how Matal Marandi had been injured then it is alleged that the accused-appellant confessed his guilt before the villagers and the chowkidar and give the whole story starting from the previous dates chastising and wielding such threatening by him and then causing injury on the person of Matal Marandi by Tangi. The village Chowkidar (P.W. 4) along with the villagers caught hold of the accused-appellant and then went to the police station at Jhajha together with the injured and there & fordbeyan was made by the son of the deceased P.W. 5 Fudo Marandi wherein details of the occurrence was mentioned and on the basis of that fardbeyan a police case was registered. The accused was arrested and the injured was sent to hospital but on that date itself in course of treatment the injured died. He did not regain his consciousness till his death. Before Police also the accused made confession regarding his guilt and he has specifically stated that he had committed the offence by means of Tangi having a wooden handle fixed on it and that the same Tangi had been concealed in the corner room of his house. On such statement, the Police went to the house of the accused-appellant and as stated by the accused-appellant the weapon was recovered from the place where mention was made by the accused-appellant. On the dead body of the deceased, post-mortem was held and after completion of investigation charge-sheet has been submitted under Sec. 302, I.P.C. against the accused-appellant.
3. On being committed to the Court of Session, charge was framed under Section 302, I.P.C. against the accused-appellant and when the same was read over and explained to him he pleaded not guilty. At that stage, the defence of the accused was of denial of his involvement with the crime.
4. For and on behalf of the prosecution as many as seven witnesses
