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

2025 Supreme(Gau) 973

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) 
MANISH CHOUDHURY, YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, JJ.
Bijoy Krishna - Appellant
Vs.
The State of Assam - Respondent
CRL.A(J) No. 93 Of 2020
Decided On : 20-05-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. H. Gupta, Amicus Curiae
For the Respondent: Ms. B. Bhuyan, Senior Counsel & Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam

The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt for a murder conviction, and suspicion alone cannot substitute for proof.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 383 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Criminal appeal against conviction for murder - Accused convicted based on circumstantial evidence and last seen theory - Insufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; chain of circumstances necessary for conviction was incomplete - Prosecution relied on hearsay and lacked key witness testimony. (Paras 1, 9, 34, 40, 42)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, convicted for murder, was accused of killing Dasaru Tanti during a quarrel on 08.08.2009; there were several witnesses, but evidence largely consisted of hearsay. (Paras 2, 3, 9)

Findings of Court:
The appellant's conviction was overturned due to lack of credible evidence; the court emphasized that suspicion alone cannot constitute proof. (Paras 41, 42)

Issues: Whether the prosecution established the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt considering the circumstantial evidence and testimonies presented, particularly the last seen theory. (Paras 41, 42)

Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain of events leading irresistibly to the accused's guilt; failure to meet this standard results in acquittal. (Paras 40, 41)

Result: Appeal allowed; conviction set aside, appellant to be released. (Para 43)

Table of Content
1. overview of the criminal case and charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. summary of trial proceedings and crucial testimonies. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
3. arguments from both parties regarding evidence. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
4. witness testimonies and their implications. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. witness credibility and hearsay evidence. (Para 18 , 20)
6. finding inconsistencies and weaknesses in testimonies. (Para 21 , 22 , 23)
7. autopsy findings and importance of witness examination. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
8. legal guidelines on circumstantial evidence. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)
9. discussion on prosecution's reliance on circumstantial evidence. (Para 32 , 33 , 34)
10. closing considerations on evidence and case outcomes. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
11. final judgment and order of acquittal. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

Manish Choudhury, J.

1. This criminal appeal from jail under Section 383 , Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘the Code’ or ‘CrPC’, for short] is directed against a Judgment and Order dated 20.11.2019 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – II [FTC], Tinsukia in Sessions Case no. 103[T]/2012. By the Judgment and Order dated 20.11.2019, the accused-appellant has been convicted for the offence of murder under Section 302 , INDIAN PENAL CODE [IPC] and he has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another year. It has been provided that the period of detention already undergone by the accused-appellant shall be set-off against the sentence of imprisonment under Section 428 , CrPC.

2. The prosecution case is that on 09.08.2009, a First Information Report [FIR] was lodged by the informant, Surjya Mohan Tanti [P.W.3] before the Officer In-Charge, Doomdooma Police Station. In the FIR, the informant [P.W.3] had inter alia alleged that at about 10-30 p.m. on 08.08.2009, four accused persons, namely, [i] the accused-appellant, Bijoy Krishna @ Mela [hereinafter also referred to as ‘the appellant’ or ‘A-1, at places, for short’]; [ii] Bishal Krishna @ Bom [‘A-2’]; [iii] Anit Krishna [‘A-3’]; and [iv] Pinku Krishna @ Tinku [‘A-4’]; who were brothers, got engaged in an altercation with Dasaru Tanti, a resident of Mankhowa Tea Estate, Prem Nagar Basti. The deceased, Dasaru Tanti was an elder brother of the informant’s wife. According to the informant, the altercation arose due to a domestic matter. In the altercation which occurred at Line no. 15, the accused persons assaulted Dasaru Tanti and caused grievous injuries on his head and face. As a result, Dasaru Tanti died on the spot. It was further alleged that the mother of the deceased, Paikon Tanti [P.W.2] was also assaulted along with him.

3. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer In-Charge, Doomdooma Police Station registered the same as Doomdooma Police Station Case no. 303/2009 under Section 302 , IPC read with Section 34 , IPC and the investigation was entrusted to one Babu Singh [P.W.10], a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Doomdooma Police Station.

4. During the course of investigation, the I.O. [P.W.10] arrested three of the four accused persons, A-1, A-2 & A-3 and after arrest, they were forwarded to the Court. However, the I.O. could not arrest the fourth accused person viz. Pinku Tanti @ Tinku [A-4]. In the course of investigation, the I.O. visited the Place of Occurrence [P.O.] at Line no. 15 of Mankhowa Tea Estate and recorded the statements of the witnesses under Section 161 , Cr.P.C. The I.O. prepared a Sketch Map of the P.O. [Ext.-7] and also conducted the inquest proceeding on the deadbody of the deceased through an Executive Magistrate who after inquest, submitted an Inquest Report [Ext.-2]. The Post-Mortem Examination [PME] on the deadbody of the deceased was performed at Tinsukia Civil Hospital on 09.08.2009. After completing investigation into the case, the I.O. submitted a charge sheet under

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