IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MANISH CHOUDHURY, KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, JJ.
Leben Ramchiary - Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam, Represented by Public Prosecutor, Assam - Respondent
Criminal Appeal [J] No. 25 of 2022
Decided On : 01-08-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of criminal case facts (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. court's considerations on confessions (Para 10 , 13 , 14 , 20 , 23 , 32 , 33) |
| 3. arguments regarding evidentiary issues (Para 11 , 12) |
| 4. legal standards for evaluating child witnesses (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 36) |
| 5. final judgment and orders on appeal (Para 39 , 41 , 42) |
| 6. final ruling and directives issued by the court. (Para 40) |
JUDGMENT :
M. Choudhury, J.
The instant criminal appeal from jail under Section 383 , Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC] is preferred against a Judgment and Order dated 23.09.2021 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Baksa at Mushalpur in Sessions Case no. 50 of 2020, which arose out of Mushalpur Police Station Case no. 41/2020 and corresponding PRC Case no. 834/2020. In the trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Baksa, the accused-appellant faced a charge of murder under Section 302 , INDIAN PENAL CODE [IPC] and after the trial, the learned Sessions Judge, Baksa [‘the trial court’, for short] finding the accused-appellant guilty of uxoricide for committing the murder of his wife, has convicted him under Section 300 , IPC. After hearing him on the point of sentence under Section 235[2], IPC, the learned trial court has sentenced the accused-appellant under Section 302 , IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further 6 [six] months.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that investigation into the case, Mushalpur Police Station Case no. 41/2020 was launched on 20.05.2020 when one Amrit Brahma, as the informant, lodged a First Information Report [FIR] before the In-Charge, Nikashi Out Post on that day alleging that the accused was involved behind the murder of his wife, Phishi Ramchiary on 14.05.2020.
3. On receipt of the FIR, the In-Charge, Nikashi Out Post, Mukunda Das [P.W.11] registered the same at 10-00 a.m. as Nikashi Out Post General Diary Entry No. 339 dated 20.05.2020 and forwarded the FIR to the Officer In-Charge, Mushalpur Police Station for registering a case after proper sections of law. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer In-Charge, Mushalpur Police Station registered the FIR as Mushalpur Police Station Case no. 41/2020 for the offences under Section 302 , IPC and Section 201 , IPC. The In-Charge, Nikashi Out Post, Mukunda Das [P.W.11], a Sub-Inspector of Policehad already taken up the investigation of the case on being authorized by the Officer In-Charge, Mushalpur Police Station in reference to General Diary Entry no. 339.
4. In the FIR, the informant who also testified as P.W.2, had inter alia mentioned that on 20.05.2020, the accused, Leben Ramchiary, a resident of Village No. 2 Shantipur, Police Station – Mushalpur confessed before the Government Gaonburah, Somnath Sarma [P.W.3] to the effect that on 14.05.2020, he [the accused] had killed his wife, Phishi Ramchiary with a Khukuri over domestic issues and kept the body buried under the floor of his house.
5. In the course of investigation of the case, the I.O. [P.W.11] recorded statements of a number of witnesses under Section 161 , CrPC. The dead body of the deceased was also dug out from a place inside the house of the accused on 20.05.2020. After digging out the dead body, inquest proceeding was conducted at that place itself by an Executive Magistrate on 20.05.2020. Thereafter, the dead body of the deceased, Phishi Ramchiarywas forwarded to Dr. Ravi Boro Civil Hospital, Mushalpur on 20.05.2020 itself. The I.O. after going to the place of occurrence [P.O.], that is, the house of the accused took the accused into custody. The I.O., in the course of investigation, also made seizure of a Khukuri [a sharp cutting weapon], besides preparing a Sketch Map of the P.O.
6. After completing investigation into the case, Mushalpur Police Station Case no. 41/2020 [corresponding PRC Case no. 834/2020], the I.O. submitted a charge
The court held that extra-judicial confessions can serve as strong evidence when corroborated by circumstantial evidence, affirming the lighter burden of proof in murder cases within a private home.
Extrajudicial confessions are weak evidence and require corroboration; reliance on them must be cautious and supported by credible evidence.
Extrajudicial confessions require corroboration and cannot solely establish guilt without reliable evidence.
There is no doubt that convictions can be based on extra-judicial confession but it is well settled that in very nature of things, it is a weak piece of evidence.
For a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a clear chain of evidence that excludes reasonable doubt regarding the accused's guilt.
Extra-judicial confessions are weak evidence and require corroboration; reliance on such confessions without substantive proof renders convictions unsafe.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, with the prosecution required to establish every link beyond reasonable doubt.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.