The sufficiency and reliability of circumstantial evidence in establishing guilt in criminal cases.

A. K. SHRIVASTAVA, J. :-

Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5-5-2000 passed by learned Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa in Sessions Trial No. 192/99, convicting the appellants under Sections 394, 302/ 34 and 201 of IPC and thereby sentencing them to suffer R.I. of ten years and fine of Rs. 1000/- each, in default of payment of fine R.I. for three months each, life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default of payment of fine R.I. for one year each; and R.I. of five years and fine of Rs. 500/-each, in default of payment of fine R.I. for one month each, respectively with a further stipulation that all the sentences shall run concurrently, this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by them.

2. In brief the case of prosecution is that Subhash Dwivedi lodged a report in Police Station Sohagi on 11-3-1999 that a dead body of unknown person is lying nearby the culvert of Jhiria Lad. On the basis of the said information, a Marg was registered and for inquiry of the said Marg report Investigating Officer J. P. N. Singh went to the place of occurrence. During the course of investigation Panchayatnama of the dead body was prepared and on visualizing right hand of deceased it was found that name 'Sharad' was embossed and the dead body was identified as that of Sharad (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'). Neck of the deceased was found to be chopped. Dead body was sent for post-mortem.

3. In furtherance to its investigation, the investigating agency found that a blood stained knife was lying nearby the dead body and on search of the dead body toll tax receipts and some cash memos of purchasing petrol etc. were found in the pocket of the deceased. These incriminating article were seized and spot map was also prepared. On examining the papers took out from the different pockets of the clothes which were being worn by the deceased it was found that one Manoj Salonkhe of Maharashtra was the owner of Maruti Van MH 05/H-2942 as a result of which Manoj Salonkhe was called to Police Station Sohagi where photographs of the deceased were shown to him and said Manoj Salonkhe identified the deceased to be his driver Sharad. During the course of investigation since evidence was found against the appellants they were formally arrested as they were in Central Jail, Rea in connection with Crime No. 133/99.

4. The appellants were put to test identification on 13th August, 1999 but they were not identified by Manoj Salonkhe who is the owner of Maruti Van. Later on, said Manoj Salonkhe submitted an application to Investigating Officer that again test identification parade be conducted in order to ascertain who are the real culprits as a result of which second test identification parade was conducted on 16-8-1999 in which Manoj Salonkhe correctly identified the appellants. Thereafter, on the basis of memorandum statement of appellant-Pradeep leading to recovery, a gold chain was seized from his house on 18-8-1999. This gold chain was also put for test identification and Vilas Sakharam Chouhan, who is the brother of the deceased rightly identified the gold chain.

5. After completion of the investigation a charge-sheet was submitted in the competent Court, which on its turn committed the case to the Court of Session from where it was received by the trial Court for its trial.

6. Learned trial Judge on the basis of allegations made against the appellants in the charge-sheet framed charges punishable under Sections 394, 302/34 and 201 of I.P.C. against them which they denied and requested for trial.

7. In order to prove the charges, prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and placed Exs. P-1 to P-34, the documents on record.

8. The defence of the appellants is of false implication and the same defence they setforth in their statement recorded under Section 313, Cr. P. C. However, they did not choose to examine any witness in support of their defe