High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
R. P. AWASTHY, RAJEEV GUPTA
STATE OF M.P. - Appellant
Versus
BUDHRAM - Respondents
Reference 7 Of 1995
Decided On : 11/13/1995
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - SECTION 302 IPC - CONFESSION - CORROBORATION - RELIABILITY OF WITNESS - DISCOVERY AND SEIZURE OF INCRIMINATING ARTICLES - TEST IDENTIFICATION - SECTION 134 EVIDENCE ACT - CAPITAL OFFENCE - CONVICTION BASED ON SOLITARY EVIDENCE - MAIN LEGAL POINT : In a capital offence case, conviction can be based on the solitary evidence of a reliable witness, even in the absence of corroborative evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was charged with the murders of his father, stepmother, step-brothers, step-sisters, and a daughter. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of a Kotwar (village watchman) who claimed that the accused had confessed to the murders. The accused denied the charges and claimed that people from Allahabad had committed the murders.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Kotwar's testimony was not reliable. The Kotwar had been declared hostile by the prosecution, and he had made several statements that were contradicted by other evidence. The court also found that the discovery and seizure of the murder weapon and bloodstained clothes were not properly conducted, and that the report of the serologist was not produced in court.
Issues: 1. Whether the Kotwar's testimony was reliable. 2. Whether the discovery and seizure of the murder weapon and bloodstained clothes were properly conducted. 3. Whether the report of the serologist was necessary for the prosecution's case.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Kotwar's testimony was not reliable because he had been declared hostile by the prosecution and had made several statements that were contradicted by other evidence. 2. The court held that the discovery and seizure of the murder weapon and bloodstained clothes were not properly conducted because the Kotwar was not a witness to the discovery and seizure, and because the report of the serologist was not produced in court. 3. The court held that the report of the serologist was necessary for the prosecution's case because it would have shown whether the blood on the clothes belonged to the victims.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the accused of all charges.
( 1 ) IT is a reference made under Section 366 of the Criminal Procedure Code far confirming the sentence of death awarded to the accused. The accused has also filed an appeal which has been registered as Criminal Appeal No. 1128/95 against the finding of holding him guilty for committing murders of his father Kunkuram, step-mother Ravibai, step brothers Nankua, Chatua and Shankarlal and step-sisters Jugnabai and Muliabai and recommendation for sentencing him to death.
( 2 ) IT has not been disputed by the accused that Kunkuram (since deceased) had left about 20 years prior to the date of incident his married wife Hirabai, daughter Urmila and son accused Budhram at village Basti Baradwar where they used to reside. At that time the daughter of Kunkuram to wit Urmila was aged about 5 years and his son, accused Budhram was aged about 3 years. It had also not been disputed that Kunkuram had kept Ravibai, as his wife and had gone for earning his livelihood alongwith Ravibai towards Allahabad. The mother of the accused brought up the accused and his sister by cultivating the land belonging to Kunkuram. It was she who performed marriage ceremonies of Urmilabai and subsequent to it of accused Budhram also. During the said period the accused and his mother lived in the house belonging to Kunkuram.
( 3 ) ABOUT two years prior to the date of incident, Kunkuram returned alongwith Ravibai and their six children to village Basti Baradwar and started residing in separate portion of the same house in which Hirabai and accused Budhram were residing. After Kunkuram and Ravibai returned to village Basti Baradwar they performed marriage ceremony of their eldest daughter Kiranbai (PW/17), who was residing in the house of her husband from before the time of the incident.
( 4 ) IT has also not been disputed and has been fully established from the evidence available on record that in the morning, on 26-11-93, Kunkuram, Ravibai and their five issues were found murdered.
( 5 ) THE accused has further not disputed that when kotwar Pateldas was returning from Police Station Baradwar, the accused had met him.
( 6 ) PROSECUTION case is that after returning from Basti Baradwar, Kunkuram took possession of the major portion of the house, in which the accused and his mother were residing. Kunkuram also took possession of the land which was being cultivated by the accused and his mother, and also seized cattle which were previously in possession of the accused. He used to beat Hirabai and few months prior to the date of incident had compelled Budhram to leave his village. About two months prior to the date of incident, a daughter was born to Budhram. The said daughter died after few days of her birth. Kunkuram did not attend the obsequies of the daughter of accused. On the other hand, on the date, on which the funeral rites were being performed in the house of the accused, Kunkuram got meat prepared in his house for his dinner. Due to these reasons the accused bore a grudge against his father Kunkuram.
( 7 ) ON account of the said ill will and hatred towards Kunkuram, the accused entered, in the night intervening 25th and 26th of November 1993, that portion of the house in which Kurkuram was residing alongwith his keep Ravi Bai and their issues. The accused inflicted injuries on Kunkuram, Ravibai, Chatua Nankua Shankarlal, Juganabai and Muliabai by means of Gandasa (Article-A), which was prepared by Tijauram (PW/2) for the accused. Thereafter, the accused changed his clothes and proceeded for the police station. In the way when he met Kotwar Pateldas (PW/10), he confessed to him extra judicially that he had committed murders of his father, step-mother, his step-brothers and stepsisters. Thereupon, Kotwar Pateldas (PW/10) took the accused/appellant to Police Station, where Kotwar Pateldas (PW/10) lodged first information report (Ex. P/17 ). On the basis of the information given by Pateldas (PW/10), the report (Ex. P/18) to Ex. P/24) regarding
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.