SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Anish Dayal, JJ.
Banarsi Lal - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Crl.A. 43 of 2020
Decided On : 02-12-2022




Circumstantial evidence can sustain a murder conviction when it demonstrates motive, opportunity, and establishes a clear temporal connection between the accused and the crime.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 201 - Conviction for murder and destruction of evidence - Appellant convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment with fines due to circumstantial evidence linking him to the crime - The prosecution demonstrated motive and last seen evidence, supported by a post-mortem report indicating homicide. (Paras 1, 9, 24, 23)

(B) Criminal Law - Circumstantial evidence - The chain of evidence including the recovery of the victim's mobile phone (used in a ransom call) and timely reporting of the body was crucial in upholding the conviction despite the absence of direct witnesses. (Paras 10, 32)

Facts of the case:
Appellant was accused of murdering Harish (deceased) on 5th January 2009; after a series of events leading to the recovery of a headless body in a box, evidence linked the appellant to both the motive concerning a financial dispute and the crime's timeframe.

Findings of Court:
The court found sufficient circumstantial evidence to convict as the time frame of death and circumstantial connections pointed to the appellant's involvement in the murder, including an unimpeded escape amid renovations causing lack of investigation.

Issues: The main issues included the adequacy of circumstantial evidence, whether a full chain of events was presented, and if the prosecution adequately proved motive.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that under Section 106 of the Evidence Act, the burden shifted to the appellant to explain the circumstances of the deceased's death post his last seen alive with him, finding no credible defense.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. details of the deceased's death and postmortem findings. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. circumstantial evidence and challenges to prosecution's case. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. witness testimonies corroborating the facts. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. analysis of the last seen evidence. (Para 21 , 22)
5. medical evidence supporting cause of death. (Para 23 , 27)
6. motive established through witness deposed. (Para 30 , 31)
7. burden of proof shifts to the appellant. (Para 32 , 33 , 34)
8. validation of the conviction upholding the original judgment. (Para 36 , 37)

JUDGMENT

Mukta Gupta, J. By this appeal, the appellant challenges the impugned judgment dated 30th September, 2019 whereby the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant for offences punishable under Section 302/201 of IPC and the order on sentence dated 30th November, 2019 directing the appellant to undergo life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 302 IPC, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years along with a fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 201 IPC, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 05th January, 2009, father of the deceased, Hari Prakash (PW-1) was informed by his wife, Sushila (PW-7), at about 9 PM that the accused Banarsi Lal had taken their son Harish @ Babloo (deceased) on motorcycle, but the son failed to return home. Hari Prakash tried to call his son but his mobile number 9818117020 was switched off. At about 10 PM, he went to PS Dabri and told about his missing son but he was told to wait. He searched for deceased till midnight and also during the day on 06th January, 2009. Ultimately he lodged a missing report with respect to his son and on 07th January, 2009, he contacted two boys namely Indresh Kumar and Kanhiya who belonged to the native village of the accused Banarsi Lal, who took him to the house of the accused at K-10, Chanakya Place but the accused was not found there, and they were informed that the accused had left the house on 05th January, 2009 along with his belonging and was absconding. In the afternoon of the same day i.e. on 07th, January, 2009, a telephonic call was received from mobile phone of Harish @ Babloo upon landline no. 32713948 having a caller ID facility installed in the house which was attended by Hari Prakash and the caller asked him to arrange money for his release of his son and on Hari Prakash (PW-1) asking the amount, the call was disconnected. Meanwhile, on 5th January, 2009, information vide DD No. 26A was received about one box lying near Old Age Home, Bindapur Extn., Near Shiv Mandir Old Park out of which blood was oozing out. ASI Mahender Singh (PW-13) along with Ct. Karanvir (PW-23) and other staff reached reached the spot and found an iron box on public road near H. No. C-26, New Janakpuri. ASI Mahender Singh (PW-13) broke the box open and found one headless body of a person aged about 30-35 years. Crime team was called on the spot (Ex.PW/36A & B) and ASI Mahender sent tehrir to the PS through Ct. Karambir and got the FIR No. 06/2009 under Sections 302/201 IPC registered (Ex.PW-8/C). Two cloth gamchas checkdar having blood stains were found inside the box along with another cloth piece having printed design and blood stains. After registration of the case, the first Investigating Officer, Hoshiar Singh (PW-35) made efforts for identification of the body and after completing the essential proceedings at the spot, he sent the body to DDU Hospital Mortuary. Thereafter, on the evening of 07th January, 2009, Hari Prakash received information from PS Bindapur that one headless dead body was recovered from a box near Old Age Home, Bindapur. On 8th January, 2009, Hari Prakash went to the DDU Hospital where he identified the dead body of his son from the hands and feet (Ex.PW-1/C), and his wife, Sushila (PW-7) and daughter Suj

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top