Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI, J.
Suwalal - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 1794 of 2024
Decided On : 23-04-2025
(A) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) - Request for further investigation - The trial court declined the appellant's request for further investigation into the unnatural death of the deceased, raising concerns about the classification of death as hanging rather than strangulation. The medical board's findings indicated asphyxia due to strangulation, contradicting the police's stance. (Paras 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 6, 8)
(B) Investigation - The court emphasized the necessity of allowing further investigation when serious doubts or suspicious circumstances arise, highlighting the trial court's error in denying the request. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The appeal was against the trial court's order denying further investigation into the death of a poor individual, with significant doubts raised regarding the cause of death, which was classified as hanging despite medical evidence suggesting strangulation.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the trial court erred in declining the request for further investigation, given the strong suspicious circumstances and the medical board's findings.
Issues: The main issues included the classification of death and the necessity for further investigation in light of suspicious circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that when serious doubts arise, further investigation is warranted, and the trial court's refusal to allow it was erroneous. The medical board's findings must be given due weight in determining the cause of death.
Result: Appeal allowed; the trial court's order is set aside.
JUDGMENT :
FARJAND ALI, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 31-012024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act Cases), Jalore, whereby the learned trial court declined the appellant’s request for further investigation in the matter.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, examined the case diary, and conferred with the investigating officer, this Court has also closely analyzed the post-mortem report and relevant records, including references in Modi's Medical Jurisprudence regarding hanging and strangulation.
2.1 Although there is presently no direct evidence pointing towards the culpability of any specific accused, significant suspicious circumstances raise legitimate concerns. The coloured photographs attached to the case diary do not convincingly suggest a case of suicidal hanging. The marks on the neck of the deceased are inconsistent with the typical features seen in suicidal hanging. While this Court does not claim to override the findings of the medical experts, it must be emphasized that its observations should be considered as expressing judicial doubt.
2.2 Importantly, the post-mortem report, prepared by a duly constituted medical board, indicates that saliva was not found dribbling from the mouth—a common symptom in cases of hanging. In hanging, the tilted position of the neck usually causes saliva to drip onto the chin and chest. This symptom was absent in the present case.
To provide clarity on the medico-legal differences between hanging and strangulation , a comparative table is set out below:
| Hanging | Strangulation |
| 1. Mostly suicidal. | 1. Mostly homicidal. |
| 2. Ligature mark, oblique, non- continuous, placed high up in the neck between the chin and the larynx, the base of the groove or furrow being hard, yellow and parchment-like. | 2. Ligature mark, horizontal or transverse, continuous, round the neck, low down in the neck below the thyroid, the base of the groove or furrow being soft and reddish. |
| 3. Abrasions and ecchymoses round about the edges of the ligature mark, rare. | 3. Abrasions and ecchymoses round about the edges of the ligature mark, common. |
| 4. Subcutaneous tissues under the mark, white, hard, and glistening. | 4. Subcutaneous tissues under the mark, ecchymosed. |
| 5. Injury to the muscles of the neck, rare. | 5. Injury to the muscles of the neck, common. |
| 6. Carotid arteries, internal coats ruptured in violent cases of a long drop. | 6. Carotid arteries, internal coats ordinarily ruptured |
| 7. Fracture of the larynx and trachea, very rare and that too in judicial hanging. | 7. Fracture of the larynx and trachea, often found, also hyoid bone. |
| 8. Fracture-dislocation of the cervical vertebre, common in judicial hanging. | 8. Fracture-dislocation of the cervical vertebre, rare. |
| 9. Scratches, abrasions and bruises on the face, neck and other parts of the body, usually not present. | 9. Scratches, abrasions and bruises on the face, neck and other parts of the body, usually present. |
| 10. Face, usually pale and no petechie. | 10. Face, congested, livid and marked with petechie. |
| 11. Neck, stretched and elongated in fresh bodies. | 11. Neck, not so. |
| 12. External signs of asphyxia, usually not well marked. | 12. External signs of asphyxia, very well marked (minimal if death due to vaso-vagal effect). |
| 13. Bleeding from the nose, mouth and ears, very rare. | 13. Bleeding from the nose, mouth and ears, may be found. |
| 14. Saliva, running out of the mouth down on the chin and chest. | 14. Saliva, no such running. |
| 15. Emphysematous patches on the surface of the lungs, not presesnt. | 15. Emphysematous patches on the sur-face of the lungs, may be present. |
2.3 The medical board clearly opined that the cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation. Why the police officers are adamant to show that it is a case of hanging is a further question to ponder. How the opinion of a duly constituted board of three doctors, who personally examined the body of the deceased and conducted the autopsy, could be disregarded is another
AI
The court emphasized that serious doubts or suspicious circumstances necessitate further investigation, overriding the trial court's refusal based on insufficient evidence against specific accused.
Point of law : To encompass two imperatives; firstly, the investigation must be unbiased, honest, just and in accordance with law; and secondly, the entire emphasis has to be to bring out the truth o....
in case when the incident has taken place in the house of the family members, including deceased residing together, it is duty of accused to explain the circumstances in which method and manner, the ....
The court emphasized the importance of reasonable doubt in criminal convictions, prioritizing evidence and credible arguments regarding the cause of death.
The prosecution must establish the charge beyond a reasonable doubt, and in cases based on circumstantial evidence, conclusive evidence is crucial to prove the case.
In the absence of any corroborating evidence, it would be highly unsafe to the award conviction for committing murder solely on the basis of medical evidence.
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
