The need for complete circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Ashutosh Kumar, J.

1. Arun Kumar @ Bihari challenges his conviction vide judgment dated 5.9.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), NDPS-West Delhi in Sessions Case No. 48/2010 (reference FIR No. 21/2010, P.S. Anand Parbat) under Section 302/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for short) for committing the murder of one Bunty and throwing his dead body in the tank with the help of his associates. The appellant by order on sentence dated 28.10.2014 has been directed to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for life, pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC. The appellant has been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, Simple Imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 201/34 of the IPC; the sentences however, have been ordered to run concurrently.

2. There is no eye witness to the occurrence and the prosecution case hinges on certain circumstances namely the discovery of the dead body of Bunty in the dried up water tank of the Jal Board, arrest and disclosure of two of the associates of the appellant (both of whom were Juveniles in conflict with law, ‘JCL’ for short) on the basis of which the appellant was arrested, subsequent disclosure of the appellant, leading to the recovery of blood stained danda, handkerchief, blood stained twigs and blood stained stones from near and around the place of occurrence. The recoveries as per the prosecution case were effected by the appellant and the two associates (JCLs).

3. Kallu Ram (PW.15) had lodged a missing report on 29.3.2010 vide DD No. 63B (Ex.PW.3/A) intimating to the police that his son Bunty (deceased) was missing since 25.3.2010. In the aforesaid report no suspicion was raised against anybody.

4. On 30.3.2010 Constable Satish Kumar (PW.2) was informed by some children who were playing cricket near the water tank that bad smell was emanating from the said water tank. On this information, Constable Satish Kumar (PW.2) went to the roof of the water tank and thereafter he went inside the tank through the stairs. He saw that a dead body was lying there. He gave this information to the police station, (DD No. 16A; Ex.PW.1/A). Immediately thereafter, other police officers namely Sub Inspector Padam Singh (PW.22), Constable Virender (PW.4), Constable Sandeep (PW.20) came to the spot. The dead body was decomposed and maggot eaten. The crime team and the photographer were called. Inside the tank, blood stained stones were found. A human tooth and some hair also were found near the dead body. The wall of the tank was found to be blood-smeared. The blood stains suggested that the dead body was dragged from some distance and was thrown in the tank.

5. Since Kallu Ram (PW.15) had lodged the missing report about his son Bunty on 29.3.2010 (DD No. 63B Ex.PW.3/A), he was called to the place where the dead body was found. He identified the dead body to be that of his son on the basis of clothes, bandage, footwear, photograph in the wallet which was found in the pocket of the trouser of the deceased. The incriminating items including the purse and blood control were seized. Pursuant to the recovery of the dead body and identification by Kallu Ram (PW.15) as that of his son Bunty, FIR No. 21/2010, Police Station Anand Parbat (Ex.PW.10/A) was registered. A site plan (Ex.PW.23/A) was prepared and the dead body was sent for post mortem.

6. Dr. Amit Sharma (PW.12) conducted the post mortem and opined that the death was due to cranio cerebral damage consequent upon multiple blunt force impacts to the head and face region by some hard and blunt object, which injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. PW.12 opined that injuries Nos. 1 to 8 were caused by a blunt object and injury Nos. 9 and 10 were caused by sharp object, all of which were ante-mortem. Th