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) 1098

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) 
MANISH CHOUDHURY, MARLI VANKUNG, JJ.
Fulekar Minj - Appellant 
Versus
The State of Assam - Respondent 
Criminal Appeal [J] no. 40 of 2020
Decided On : 15-05-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ms. R.D. Mazumdar, Amicus Curiae
For the Respondent: Ms. B. Bhuyan

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.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 383 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Conviction for fratricide reversed due to lack of conclusive evidence linking the appellant to the crime and inadmissibility of confessions made while in police presence. (Paras 42, 43)

(B) It was found that the prosecution failed to establish all the necessary circumstances to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt, reiterating that mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction. (Paras 40, 41)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was accused of murdering his brother during a land dispute in 2018. The accusation was based on circumstantial evidence as there were no eyewitnesses to the incident. Multiple witnesses testified to the relationship between the parties and the alleged motive, but inconsistencies emerged. (Paras 3, 4, 7, 34)

Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the prosecution did not present reliable and credible evidence to establish the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, leading to reversal of the conviction. (Paras 42, 43)

Issues: The court addressed the adequacy of circumstantial evidence linking the appellant to the crime and the admissibility of confessions made to police officers. (Paras 26, 40)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that establishing a clear chain of events is essential in circumstantial cases, and any element of doubt should favor the accused. (Paras 37, 39)

Result: Conviction set aside; the appellant is to be released from custody. (Para 43)

Table of Content
1. procedural background of the case. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 6)
2. introduction of the case and procedural aspects. (Para 2)
3. investigation and trial process overview. (Para 5)
4. summary of parties' arguments regarding evidence. (Para 7 , 8)
5. evaluation of circumstantial evidence and confessions. (Para 21)
6. importance of extra-judicial confession and circumstantial evidence. (Para 22 , 30 , 34 , 40)
7. standard of proof in circumstantial evidence cases. (Para 26 , 37)
8. final decision and instructions for victim compensation. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)

JUDGMENT :

Manish Choudhury, J.

This criminal appeal from Jail under Section 383 , Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘CrPC’ or ‘the Code’, for short] is directed against a Judgment and Order dated 09.09.2019 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udalguri in Sessions Case no. 144/2018, which arose out of G.R. Case no. 674/2018 and Harisinga Police Station Case no. 30/2018. In the trial, the accused-appellant faced a charge of fratricide and after conclusion of the trial, the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udalguri finding him guilty for the offence of murder, has convicted the accused-appellant under Section 302 , INDIAN PENAL CODE [IPC]. The accused-appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another 6 [six] months.

2. We have heard Ms. R.D. Mazumdar, learned Amicus Curie for the accused-appellant and Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel & Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State.

3. The machinery of investigation was set into motion on lodgment of a First Information Report [FIR] before the Officer In-Charge, Harisinga Police Station on 08.07.2018 by the informant, Smti. Karmi Minj [P.W.1]. In the FIR, the informant [P.W.1] had inter-alia stated that at around 08-00 a.m. on 08.07.2018, her husband, Bhonda Minj [‘the deceased’] was hacked to death with a spade in the agricultural field of the deceased located at no. 2 Kherkheria by his younger brother, Fulekar Minj [‘the accused’] over a dispute regarding land. The informant had thereby, requested to conduct an investigation into the incident.

4. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer In-Charge, Harisinga Police Station registered the FIR as Harisinga Police Station Case no. 30/2018 [corresponding G.R. Case no. 674/2018] for the offence under Section 302 , IPC. The accused-appellant was arrested on the date of the incident itself, that is, on. 08.07.2018. The investigation was undertaken by the Officer In-Charge, Harisinga Police Station, Sri Powal Hazarika, Sub-Inspector of Police [P.W.10]. After completing the investigation, the Investigating Officer [I.O.] submitted a charge-sheet under Section 173[2], CrPC vide Charge Sheet no. 22/2018 dated 30.08.2018 finding a prima facie case under Section 302 , IPC well established against the accused-appellant.

5. On receipt of the Charge-Sheet in connection with Harisinga Police Station Case no.

30/2018, the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udalguri, BTAD secured appearance of the accused-appellant from judicial custody on 29.09.2018. As the offence under Section 302 , IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udalguri committed the case records of G.R. Case no. 674/2018 to the Court of Sessions, Udalguri by a an Order of Commitment dated 29.09.2018. The accused-appellant was furnished the copies in compliance of the provisions of Section 207, CrPC on 29.09.2018. While fixing the case on 12.10.2018 before the learned Sessions Court, Udalguri the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udalguri vide its Order of Commitment dated 29.09.2018 directed to notify the learned Public Prosecutor accordingly and to produce the accused before the Court of Sessions on 12.10.2018.

6. On receipt of the case records of G.R. Case no. 674/2

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