IMPORTANT POINT
An accused cannot be convicted based solely on suspicion; proof beyond reasonable doubt is essential, especially in circumstantial evidence cases.

JUDGMENT :

RITU BAHRI, C.J.

1. The appellant has come up in appeal against the judgment and order dated 12.08.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kotdwar, Pauri Garhwal, Uttarakhand in Sessions Trial No. 40 of 2012, whereby the respondent no. 2 has been acquitted for the offence under Sections 302, 376, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that an application was given by applicant (Appellant in the present appeal) to the Patwari Patti Seela-1, Kotdwar stating that his daughter, aged 17 years, was missing since 09.08.2012 whose missing report was filed by the applicant on 12.08.2012 in the Police Chowki-Dugadda, later during the search, the dead body was found on 13.08.2012 in the bushes in a deep ditch of Parry Ki Roli, about 300 meters below the residential house of the applicant within the limits of Village-Jhwanasar. The same day when the girl was missing, accused Sohan Singh resident of Village Jamargaddi/Katal came to Village Jhwanasar and had drunk in the house of Kesavanand and went towards his village Katal at around5 pm. The applicant got the information that his daughter had also got down from the jeep from Kotdwar and was coming on foot to her home on the same day but she did not reach home. The applicant made statement that he is sure that under the influence of alcohol the accused Sohan Singh, saw his daughter coming alone in a secluded place in the forest, she was brutally murdered and her body was hidden in the bushes and requested to file a report.

3. On the basis of the above complaint, a case was registered against the accused Sohan Singh in Patti Seela-1 under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and subsequently, the investigation was transferred to Kotdwar Police Station.

4. After Investigation, a charge-sheet was presented against the accused person. The charge sheet was filed against the accused person under Sections 302, 376, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Therefore, the case was committed to the Sessions court on 16.11.2012. The Charges were framed against accused Sohan Singh under section 302, 376 and 201 of the I.P.C. The accused denied the charges framed against him and demanded a trial.

5. After the charge-sheet, the following witnesses were examined for the purpose of proving the charges on behalf of the prosecution:

6. After the prosecution concluded its evidence, the statement of accused Sohan Singh was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which the accused denied the incident and said that he is innocent, the witness had given false testimony. The accused said that his mobile phone had fallen but he is not aware where it fell and refused to present evidence in his defence.

7. The Trial Court, after going through the entire evidence led by the prosecution, acquitted the accused. No offence under Section 302, 376, 201 IPC was made out against the accused-Sohan Singh, as the prosecution was failed to prove the charges from the evidence available on the file.

8. The trial court further observed