Back
2025 Supreme(All) 2227
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, SANDEEP JAIN, JJ.
Sukh Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11357 of 2024
Decided on : 14-05-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : A.K. Singh Solanki,Pashali Solanki
For the Respondent: G.A.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the crime, with close temporal proximity between last seen evidence and the time of death; mere motive is insufficient for conviction.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 201 - Conviction for murder and destruction of evidence - Appellant convicted based solely on circumstantial evidence and a confessional statement - The court found no direct evidence linking the appellant to the crime, and the prosecution failed to establish a motive or a continuous chain of circumstantial evidence. (Paras 24, 25, 56)
(B) Evidence - Last seen theory - The court emphasized the need for close temporal proximity between the last seen evidence and the time of death, noting that a gap of 11 days raised reasonable doubt about the appellant's involvement. (Paras 35, 36)
(C) Confessional statements - The court ruled that confessional statements during investigation are generally inadmissible as substantive evidence. (Paras 27, 28)
Facts of the case:
The appellant, father of the deceased, was convicted for the murder of his daughter Archana, whose body was found after she went missing. The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence and the appellant's confessional statement. (Paras 5, 24)
Findings of Court:
The court found the prosecution's case unproven, lacking direct evidence and a coherent circumstantial link to the appellant. (Paras 56, 58)
Issues: The main issues addressed were the admissibility of confessional statements, the validity of the last seen evidence, and the absence of direct evidence linking the appellant to the crime. (Paras 24, 36)
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the prosecution failed to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain without gaps, and that motive must be established in cases relying solely on circumstantial evidence. (Paras 35, 56)
Result: Appeal allowed; the appellant acquitted due to lack of evidence.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court hears submissions from both parties. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. factual background of the case and evidence presented. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. defence witnesses assert alternative scenarios. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 4. arguments on circumstantial evidence and lack of direct evidence. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. discussion on the importance of proximity in circumstantial evidence. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 6. court emphasizes the need for a complete chain of evidence. (Para 35 , 36) |
| 7. legal precedents on last-seen evidence and its implications. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 8. court questions the reliability of the prosecution's evidence. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 9. court finds inconsistencies in the prosecution's case. (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 10. court concludes the prosecution failed to establish motive. (Para 49 , 50) |
| 11. court's ruling on acquittal and order for release. (Para 56 , 57) |
1. Heard Sri A.K. Singh Solanki, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Vikas Goswami, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. At the outset, it has been stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the present is a case of no evidence. The judgment and order of the learned court below is unsustainable as same has been passed solely on the strength of the confessional statement of the present appellant. Further, it has been stated, the appellant-Sukh Lal is the father of the deceased girl. He has remained confined for more than two years. He is suffering from cancer. Thus, it has been pressed that requirement of paper book may be dispensed and appeal itself be heard on its merit.
3. Learned A.G.A., with all fairness, does not oppose the prayer. Learned counsel for the parties have availed the opportunity to go through the lower court record. Thereafter, we have heard their submissions on the appeal, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.
4. The present appeal arises from the judgment and orders dated 27.09.2024 and 30.09.2024 passed by Sri Narendra Nath Pandey, Additional Sessions Judge/ Fast Track Court- II, Court No.24, Shahjahanpur in Sessions Case No.762 of 2023 ( State of U.P. Vs. Sukhlal ), arising out of Case Crime No.47 of 2023, under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station- Sindhauli, District- Shahjahanpur, whereby the present appellant has been convicted under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. He has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C and fine of Rs.50,000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo additional imprisonment of two years. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years and fine of Rs.10,000/- for offence under Section 201 I.P.C and in default of payment of fine to further undergo additional imprisonment of two months. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
5. The prosecution story emerged on the FIR registered on the Written Report described to have been submitted by the present appellant on 24.01.2023. Thus, the FIR was registered on 24.01.2023 at about 10:06 p.m. at Police Station- Sindhauli, District- Shahjahanpur in Case Crime No.47 of 2023 disclosing that the daughter of the appellant, namely, Archana aged about 18 years, who was a student of Class XII, went missing on 10.01.2023 after she left home for school. Despite many efforts, she could not be traced out. On 24.01.2023, at about 09:00 a.m., the dead body of Archana was discovered near the pond in another village, Deuria, Kalyanpur. Upon such discovery, the appellant expressed apprehension that Archana had been done to death.
6. Prior to the FIR being lodged, upon the recovery of the dead body of Archana, ‘Panchayatnama’ was prepared on 24.01.2023, between 01:09 PM and 02:15 PM. It is Ex.Ka-3 at the trial.
7. Briefly, it may be noted, according to ‘Panch’ witnesses, the death might have been caused due to drowning. On 24.01.2023 itself, at about 05:00-06:00
