In cases of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances. S.106 of the Indian Evidence Act cannot be invoked to shift the burden of proof to the accused unless the prosecution has first established clear foundational facts regarding the crime.

JUDGMENT :

K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

The appellant/accused in Sessions Case No. 225 of 2016 has preferred the present appeal challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 12.07.2022, whereby the learned Sessions Judge convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life, along with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

The prosecution case is that the deceased was employed as an Assistant Administrative Officer in the LIC Office at Thanjavur. He was residing in the first floor of a building, while the accused and his wife were residing in the ground floor of the same premises. The accused got to know of the amorous looks exchanged between his wife and the deceased and believed that they were enamoured of each other and consequently, he suspected that they were having a relationship. On 20.12.2016 at about 7:30 a.m., the accused is alleged to have picked up a quarrel with the deceased, which escalated, culminating in the commission of murder of the deceased. Thereafter, the accused allegedly locked the premises and absconded. The altercation is stated to have been witnessed by P.W.1, who was also working in the same LIC office. When the deceased did not report for duty, P.W.1 went in search of him, proceeded to the residence, and found the deceased lying murdered. He thereafter informed the higher officials and lodged a complaint with the jurisdictional police. On receipt of the complaint, the Sub-Inspector of Police registered a case under Section 174 Cr.P.C. and forwarded the First Information Report to the Court as well as to the Inspector of Police for investigation. The Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence, prepared the observation mahazar and rough sketch, and conducted inquest over the body in the presence of panchayatdars. The body was thereafter sent for post-mortem examination.

2.1.During the course of investigation, on 21.12.2016 at about 8:00 p.m., the accused was arrested. In the presence of witnesses, he is stated to have given a voluntary confession, pursuant to which blood- stained clothes (shirt and pant) were recovered. The Investigating Officer examined several witnesses, collected documentary evidence, obtained the post-mortem report and viscera report, and, upon completion of investigation, filed the final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Thanjavur. The case was taken on file in P.R.C. No. 7 of 2016. After furnishing copies under Section 207 Cr.P.C., the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, as the offence was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court.

2.2.The learned Sessions Judge took the case on file as S.C.No. 225 of 2016, framed charges against the accused, and upon the accused pleading not guilty, proceeded with the trial. The prosecution examined P.W. 1 to P.W.20, marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P13, and produced Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.15.Upon questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against them, the accused denied the same as false. Neither witness has been examined on the side of the accused nor any document has been marked on the side of the accused as a defence side.

2.3.Upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty and convicted and sentenced him as stated above. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been filed.

3.Submissions