Back
2002 Supreme(Gau) 158
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
D.Biswas, I.A.Ansari, JJ.
Nabab Ali -Appellant
Versus
State of Assam -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 207 of 1998
Decided On : 09-04-2002
G.Choudhary, A.S.Choudhary, R.Ali
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, every link in the chain of circumstances pointing towards the guilt of the accused must be clearly established, and every reasonable hypothesis of the innocence of the accused must be excluded.
Headnote:
Section 302 IPC - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Benefit of doubt - Appeal allowed
Fact of the Case:
The accused was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the death of his wife, based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution's case was that the accused assaulted and tortured his wife, leading to her death. The accused appealed against the judgment and order of conviction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence on record did not conclusively prove that the accused had administered poison to the deceased. The court noted that the possibility of suicide by the deceased could not be excluded, and the evidence was inadequate and inconclusive. As a result, the benefit of doubt was given to the accused, and the appeal was allowed.
Issues: The main issue was whether the finding of guilt arrived at by the trial court was justified based on the evidence on record and the relevant law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, every link in the chain of circumstances pointing towards the guilt of the accused must be clearly established, and every reasonable hypothesis of the innocence of the accused must be excluded. The court also highlighted the need for the prosecution to prove, excluding all reasonable possibilities, that it was the accused who had administered poison.
Final Decision: The appeal succeeded, and the order of conviction and sentence against the accused was set aside. The accused was directed to be set at liberty forthwith.
Aggrieved by the judgment and order, dated 14.9.98, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Guwahati, in Secessions Case No. 218(K)/ 95 convicting the accused appellant under Section 302, IPC, and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00. and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months, the accused-appellant has preferred this appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be stated as follows:
Daliman Nessa, daughter of Md Bahej Uddin Munchi, died after about 12 to 14 years of her marriage with accused Nabab AH. Since the accused wanted to marry another woman, he started assaulting and torturing Daliman. About 10-12 days before her death, Daliman had come to her father's house and remained there for a few days. Thereafter, her parents sent her along with their co-villagers, namely, Sorab Ali Munshi. Hakim Uddin and Kalu Diwani to Nabab Ali's house, who somehow, persuaded the accused to let Daliman live there. Three or four days thereafter, accused brought Daliman, lying on a wooden plank with injuries on her person, to her father's house. She told Sorab Ali and others that she had been beaten by her husband. Later on, accused Nabab and others took Daliman to doctor from her father's house. Three or four days thereafter, Daliman died, on 9.6.92, at the house of the accused. On coming to know about her death, her father lodged a written ejahar, on 9.6.92, itself, at Sontoli Police Outpost, alleging inter alia, that on the previous night, accused had killed Daliman by assaulting her inhumanity. Based on this ejahar, Boko PS Case No. 81/92 under Section 302IPC was registered against the accused. Police held inquest over the said dead body and prepared inquest report. Post-mortem examination was concluded on the said dead body. The stomach contents of the said deceased, on chemical analysis, revealed presence of carbonate pesticide. Upon completion of investigation, police laid charge sheet (Ext-3) against the accused under Section 302 IPC.
3. On the case being committed to the Court of Sessions, learned Additional Sessions Judge framed a charge under Section 302 IPC against the accused, but when the said charge was read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty thereto.
4. During trial, prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses including Investigating Officer. The accused was, then, examined under Section 313 CrPC the case of the defence being that of denial. No evidence was, however, adduced by the defence.
5. On conclusion of the trial, learned Judge pronounced judgment and order, dated 14.9.98, convincing and sentencing the accused-appellant as hereinabove mentioned.
6. The moot question, which falls for determination in this appeal, is thus:
Whether the finding of guilt arrived at by the learned trial Court is justified on the basis of the evidence on record and the law relevant thereto?
7. We have carefully perused the entire records of the case including the impugned judgment and order. We have heard Mr A.S. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant, and Mr G. Choudhury, learned Public Prosecutor, Assam.
8. On perusal of records, what attracts our eyes prominently is that according to PW-6 (Dr Dipak Das), post-mortem examination performed on the said deadbody revealed abrasion measuring 2cm x 5cm on right temporal region of the deceased above her right cheek and 3cm on the right from lateral angle of the right eye. It is also in the evidence of PW-6 that the viscera preserved, on chemical analysis by Forensic Science Laboratory, disclosed that the stomach contents had given positive tests for carbonate pesticide. PW-6, therefore, concluded that Daliman's death was caused due to carbonate pesticide, Ext-1 being the post-mortem report and Ext-2 being the report from the said laboratory.
9. When PW-6 was cross-examined by defence, his findings and opinion were not disputed by
