Back
1971 Supreme(Gau) 3
ASSAM AND NAGALAND HIGH COURT
D.N. Sen , M. C. Patha, J
MALE BORONI
VERSUS
THE STATE
Criminal Appeal No. 127 (J) of 1968,
Decided on : January 18, 1971.
The judgment established the principle that suspicion, however strong, is not a substitute for legal, reliable, and unimpeachable evidence required to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal proceeding.
Headnote:
Section 302 - Indian Penal Code - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the evidence and interpretation of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with punishment for murder. The judgment highlighted the requirements for establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the admissibility of confessional statements and extra-judicial confessions under the Evidence Act.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death of the deceased by inflicting multiple injuries. The prosecution's case relied on eyewitness testimony and a retracted confessional statement made by the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the charge under Section 302, Indian Penal Code against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence raised strong suspicion but did not amount to proof, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Issues: The key issues included the reliability of eyewitness testimony, admissibility of the retracted confessional statement, and the sufficiency of evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of legal, reliable, and unimpeachable evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal proceeding. It also highlighted the requirements for voluntary confessions and the inadmissibility of confessions obtained under inducement, threat, or promise.
Final Decision: The conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant were set aside, and the accused-appellant was ordered to be set at liberty forthwith.
Pathak, J. :- This appeal from jail is directed against the order of conviction of the appellant under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentence of imprisonment for life.
2. The prosecution case is that on the night of 15th October, 1967 at about 2 a.m. while Gurmao Boro was sleeping in his house his first wife Male Boroni struck several dao blows on him. On receipt of the dao blows Gurmao Boro ran towards the house of Khala Boro and accused Male Boroni chased him with the dao in her hand. Gurmao Boro fell down in the court-yard of Khala Boro and the accused Male Boroni dealt him two more blows with the dao-Meanwhile, the second wife of Gurmao Boro who was sleeping in another, house-roused by the sound, went to the house where Gurmao Boro was sleeping. She saw Gurmao Boro running towards the house of Khala Boro being chased by Male Boroni with a dao in hand. She found Gurmao Boro lying in the courtyard of Khala boro and the accused gave two more blows on him. She then called the neighbours. At this Jalu and Chawa Boro came to the place of occurrence and they called Dhaniram Basumatari. The accused on being questioned by Dhaniram Basumatari, confessed that she intentionally killed her husband out of sheer disgust and sorrow. Khala snatched away the dao from the hand of the accused. In the meantime, Gurmao succumbed to the injuries. Dhaniram Basumatari lodged the first information report at Bijni Police Station.
3. On completion of investigation the Police submitted charge-sheet against the accused Mala Boroni under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate framed a charge under Section 302, Indian Penal Code against the accused and committed him to stand his trial before Sessions Court. Before the Sessions Judge also the accused Male Boroni was charged under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined seven witnesses including the doctor and the Police Officer. The defence did not examine any witness. The defence was that of denial.
4. On an examination of the evidence of P.W. 1. Dr. J. N. Bhuyan. Sub-Divisional Medical and Health Officer. Dhubri who examined the dead body of deceased Gurmao Boro, it is found that there were eight incised injuries on the body of Gurmao Boro which are as follows :-
(1) Incised injury over the upper part of the front of the neck more on the left over the left 4" x 2" x 1 1/2.
(2) One incised would over the dorsom of the left wrist joint area 2" x 1" cutting the lower end of the radius.
(3) One incised wound over interdigital space of the left thumb and index finger 2" x 1/2" x 1/2".
(4) One incised wound over the outer aspect of the middle of the left forearm 2 1/2" x 1/2".
(5) One incised wound over the left cheek 1 1/2" x 1/2" skin deep.
(6) One incised wound over the medial aspect of the right wrist joint cutting the lower end of the radius 2" x 3/4" x 1/2".
(7) One incised wound over the thenar area of the right palm 3" x 1/2".
(8) One incised wound over the outer aspect of the middle of the right forearm 2" x 1/2" x 1/2".
5. In the opinion of the doctor the death was due to shock and haemorrhage following the aforesaid injuries which were antemortem.
6. On consideration of the evidence of the doctor as well as the other prosecution evidence on record, there is no doubt that Gurmao Boro died as a result of the injuries caused on his person on the date of occurrence.
7. The next and the most important point that requires consideration is whether the accused Male Boroni caused the injuries on the person of Gurmao Boro as alleged by the prosecution. Mr. G. Sarma, the learned Advocate, appearing as amicus curiae, submits that there is no reliable evidence in the instant case to prove the charge against the accused. We have examined the evidence on record. P.W. 5, Landi Boroni is stated to be the eye witness of the occurrence. She is the younger wife of deceased Gurmao Boro. Her evidence in substance, is that on the night of occurrence on hearing some noise, sh
