Back
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, MRIDUL KUMAR KALITAL
Nim Daimary @ Mohim – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(S.K. Medhi, J)
The present appeal has been preferred from jail against a judgment and order dated 24.08.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Karbi Anglong, Diphu in Sessions Case No. 30/2011 (G.R. Case No. 613/2006 and Howraghat P.S. Case No. 139/2006. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been convicted with R.I. for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) u/s 302 of IPC , in default, R.I. for 1 year only and further R.I. for 7 years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- i/d R.I. for 1 year u/s 201 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The appeal involves the murder of the wife of the appellant.
3. The criminal law was set into motion by lodging of an Ejahar by PW1 on 05.12.2006. It was stated that the deceased, who was his niece was married to the appellant about 20 years back and was living with him along with three children. However, on 09.06.2006, it was informed that the niece had eloped with someone else and after making a search, her whereabouts could not be found. Thereafter, from certain source, it was learnt that the appellant had confessed that on the same date, i.e. 09.06.2006 at about 10 p.m., he had killed the deceased and threw her into the Sonarijan River. Th
A confession can be the sole basis for conviction if found voluntary and truthful, despite the absence of Legal Aid.
The court established that circumstantial evidence, when unbroken and corroborated by confession, can lead to a conviction for murder, emphasizing the burden of proof on the accused.
Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain of evidence excluding all reasonable hypotheses of innocence; extrajudicial confessions need corroboration to be reliable.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC, emphasizing that the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident fell within Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
Provisions of Section 164 Cr.P.C must be complied with not only in form, but in essence.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain without breaks, and extrajudicial confessions require corroboration; benefit of doubt is given to the accused when evidence is insufficient.
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires substantial corroboration, particularly with confessions, where voluntariness and trustworthiness must be proven to avoid wrongful convictions.
The confession recorded without statutory compliance is inadmissible, undermining the prosecution's circumstantial evidence in a murder appeal, reinforcing the principle of presumption of innocence.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
