Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Jhk) 655

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JJ.
Tinai Baski S/o Shri Jalpa Baski – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 945 of 2018
Decided On : 12-09-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Rohit Ranjan Sinha, Manjula Upadhyay
For the Respondent: Vishwanath Rai

IMPORTANT POINT
Extra-judicial confessions must be corroborated and cannot solely support a conviction, especially when obtained under duress.

Headnote:
(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302 and 201 - Conviction based on extra-judicial confession - The court emphasized that extra-judicial confessions must be treated with caution and corroborated by reliable evidence - The prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, as there was no eye-witness and the confession was obtained under duress. (Paras 21-27)
(B) Extra-judicial Confession - The court reiterated that such confessions are weak evidence and require corroboration - The confession in this case was deemed unreliable due to the circumstances under which it was obtained, including the physical assault on the appellant. (Paras 21-26)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of a 5-year-old girl based on circumstantial evidence and an extra-judicial confession made under duress after he was assaulted by villagers. The prosecution's case lacked direct evidence and relied heavily on the confession, which was contested.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the extra-judicial confession, which was obtained under coercion.
Issues: The main issues included the admissibility and reliability of the extra-judicial confession and whether the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to establish guilt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the extra-judicial confession was not credible due to the circumstances of its procurement, and the prosecution did not establish a complete chain of evidence linking the appellant to the crime.
Result: Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside.

JUDGMENT :

PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Present criminal appeal has been preferred by the above named sole appellant against his conviction and sentence dated 29.05.2018/31.05.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Dumka in S.T. Case No. 185 of 2013 arising out of Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 36 of 2012, G.R. Case No. 333 of 2012 (hereinafter called the impugned judgment and order), whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for the offence under sections 302, 201 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under section 302 of IPC along with fine of Rs.500 and 7 years R.I. and fine of Rs.500 for the offence under section 201 of IPC with default stipulation.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The prosecution story as depicted in the FIR is that the informant’s daughter namely Sonmani Baski aged about 5-6 years along with other children of her village namely Lalpal Baski aged about 6 years son of the present appellant and Nimai Baski aged about 4 years went to play outside the house on 15.03.2012 at about 10:00 AM. It is alleged in FIR that when the daughter of informant did not return to home, then the informant interrogated with Lalpal Baski (son of the appellant), who disclosed that Sonmani Baski is with his father. Thereafter, the present appellant was inquired by the informant and villagers who flatly denied the whereabouts of missing daughter of the informant rather on the next day, he fled away from his house. On search, no clue of the daughter of the informant was found. It is further alleged that on 20.03.2012, the present appellant returned to his home then again the informant along with his son Shyamlal Baski, Gram Pradhan namely Ramchandra Murmu, Ward Parshad and other villagers went to ask him about Sonmani Baski then his father Jalpai Baski told that Sonmani has been killed and her dead body is buried in the west-north side field covered with mud and water (dal-dal). It is further alleged that on identification of the place by the present appellant and his father, the dead body of the deceased was recovered and villagers assaulted the accused persons causing grievous injuries and thereafter handed over to the police. Accordingly, the FIR was registered.

3. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted for the offences under section 302, 201 and 34 of IPC against the present appellant and his father Jalpai Baski. Both the accused persons denied the charges and claimed to be tried. After conclusion of the trial, co-accused Jalpai Baski has been acquitted extending benefit of doubt but the present appellant has been convicted and sentenced as stated above, which has been assailed in this appeal.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant has challenged the impugned judgment and order mainly on following grounds:

(ii) The son of the appellant namely Lalpal Baski aged about 6 years was never interrogated by the police during the investigation and the informant has concocted the story about the disclosure by Lalpal Baski that Sonmani Baski is with his father (appellant).

(iii) The village pradhan namely Ramchandra Murmu in whose presence extra-judicial confession is alleged to have been made by the appellant leading to dead body of the deceased has not been examined in this case. Moreover the alleged extra-judicial confession relied upon by the prosecution is absolutely irrelevant and inadmissible in evidence and no recovery of dead body was effected on the basis of alleged extorted confession of the present appellant.

(iv) The dead body of the deceased was recovered after five days of the occurrence i.e. 20.03.2012 from field covered with mud and water. No dead body can be buried in such a field and there is a probability that the