2002 Supreme(MP) 892

2002(2) JLJ 373
(SUPREME COURT)
Doraiswamy Raju and Shivaraj V. Patil, JJ.
Ashish Batham v. State of M.P.
Criminal Appeal No. 148 of 2002; from 2002(1) JLJ 289;
Decided on 9.9.2002.

Headnote:(1) Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 302 -- murder based on circumstantial evidence -- it is bad to first presume the accused guilty and thereafter to rely material against him --circumstances not proved to be beyond reasonable doubt -- conviction cannot be based.

       On the ill-fated morning of 8.4.1999, it is said that the Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal (PW 2) and his wife left the house at about 6.15 a.m. or so for a morning walk and when they returned back home by about 7.00 to 7.15 a.m., the outer door was open and a newspaper ‘Nai Duniya‘was lying in the verandah and on entry into the house, they found the younger daughter Ms. Nidhi dead with injuries at the dental clinic room and the eldest daughter Ms. Priti in the toilet with injuries, almost in a sitting position. The further case of the prosecution is that during the time between 6 a.m. and 8 a.m. or so on that day, the appellant was present in Shajapur and between 6.15 a.m. and 6.30 a.m. or so he was inside the house of Dr. Ram Avtar Mudgal (PW 2) and it was he who killed the daughters to wreak vengeance due to failure of love. [Para 2

       Held: We are constrained to place on record that both the Courts below have committed the same serious error in presuming the guilt of the appellant first and try thereafter to find out one or other reason to justify such a conclusion without an objective, independent and impartial analysis or assessment of the materials, before recording a finding on the guilt of the appellant. Contradictory standards or yardstick and lack of coherence is found writ large in the manner of consideration adopted by the Courts below. In the case of evaluation of the evidence, it could be seen so patently that insignificant things have been unduly magnified and serious lapses and withholding of vital materials and relevant witnesses have been unjustifiably glossed over despite the fact that the production of those materials would have really helped to fix the guilt or otherwise of the appellant concretely and bring about the real truth about the matter. ... We are also of the view that the doubtful and suspect nature of the evidence sought to be relied upon to substantiate the circumstances in this case themselves suffer from serious infirmities and lack of legal credibilities to merit acceptance in the hands of Courts of law, since the very circumstances sought to be relied upon themselves stood seriously undermined the existence or proof of one or more of stray circumstances in the chain, break and dislocate the link in such a manner so as to irreversibly snap the link in the chain of circumstances rendering it difficult, inappropriate as well as impossible too, to consider even one or more of them alone to either sufficiently constitute or provide the necessary basis to legitimately presume the guilt of the appellant. Judgment of High Court reversed. [Para 15

       (2) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 3 -- circumstantial evidence -- nature of -- chain of circumstances should be proved to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.

       It is well to remember that in cases where the evidence is of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should in first instance be fully established, and all the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. Again, the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency and they should be such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved. In other words, there must be a chain of evidence so far complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. AIR 1952 SC 343, (1838) 2 Lewin 227, (2002) 1 SCC 679 and (2002) 1 SCC 702 relied on. [Para 6

       (3) Criminal Practice -- fundamental and basic presumption in administration of criminal law -- is the innocence of the alleged accused -- mere suspicion is no effective substitute for legal proof.

       Realities of truth apart, the fundamental and basic presumption in the administration of criminal law and justice delivery system is the innocence of the alleged accused and till the charges are proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of clear, cogent, credible or unimpeachable evidence, the question of indicting or punishing an accused does not arise, merely carried away by heinous nature of the crime or the gruesome manner in which it was found to have been committed. Mere suspicion, however, strong or probable it may be, is no effective substitute for the legal proof. Judgment of High Court reversed. [Para 8

       (4) Criminal Trial -- finger prints of accused not produced -independent witness though named but not examined -- evidence of witnesses recorded on plea of alibi of accused not produced -- CID conducted independent investigation but not produced though cited -such facts go to show that investigation and prosecution were not impartial and real facts were masked from the Court. Judgment of High Court reversed. [Para 9

       (5) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 8 -- motive proved to be failure in to be affairs of the accused-appellant with deceased -- love affair denied by the accused, by the deceased and also by the father of the deceased -- such relations cannot be presumed on the evidence of a tutored witness. [Para 10

       (6) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 60 -- witnesses alleged to have seen the accused -- examined much after the incident -- witness hearing the cries of deceased but neither responding to it nor informing anybody -- not believable -- such creation of evidence gives strength to plea of alibi of accused. [Para 11

       (7) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 101 -- accused claiming alibi -- also examining witnesses in support -- investigation conducted but no evidence produced rather withheld -- defence witnesses cannot be disbelieved without assigning any valid reasons. Judgment of High Court reversed. [Para 11

       (8) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- Ss. 137(6) and 133 -- on complaint CID conducted the investigation -- CID officer cited as witness not examined -- investigation report also removed from file -- accused should not have been questioned about conduct of such officers. [Para 11

       (9) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 27 -- recovery of weapon, clothes and gold chain from possession of accused -- shrouded in suspicion -- cannot be believed. [Para 12

       (10) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 9 -- identification of article -- mixed articles not of similar nature -- identification cannot be believed. [Para 13

       ¼1½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 302 && gR;k ikfjfLFkfrd lk{; ij vk/kkfjr && igys vfHk;qDr ds nks"kh gksus dh mi/kkj.k dj rRi‘pkr` mlds fo#) lkexzh dk voyac ysuk nks"kiw.kZ gS && ifjfLFkfr;k¡ ;qfDr;qDr lansg ls ijs lkfcr ugha && nks"kflf) vk/kkfjr ugha dh tk ldrhA

       dfFkr gS fd 8-4-1999 dh nqHkkZX;iw.kZ lqcg Mk- jke vorkj eqn~xy ¼v lk 2½ rFkk mldh iRuh izkr&dkyhu Hkze.k ds fy, iwokZàu yxHkx 6-15 cts ?kj ls fudys rFkk tc iwokZàu yxHkx 7-00&7-15 cts og vius ?kj ykSVs rc ckgj dk }kj [kqyk Fkk rFkk *ubZ nqfu;k* lekpkji= cjkens esa iM+k FkkA ?kj esa izos‘k djus ij mUgksaus dfu"B iq=h dq- fuf/k dks naR; funkux`g eas {kfrxzLr voLFkk esa e`r ik;k rFkk T;s"Bre iq=h dq- izhfr dks ‘kkSpkY; esa yxHkx cSbh gqbZ fLFkfr esa {kfrxzLr voLFkk eas e`r ik;kA vfHk;kstu dk vkxs i{kdFku ;g gS fd ml fnu iwokZàu yxHkx 6-00 cts ls 8-00 cts ds le; ds nkSjku vihykFkhZ ‘kktkiqj esa mifLFkr Fkk rFkk iwokZàu yxHkx 6-15 cts 6-30 cts ds chp og Mk- jke vorkj eqn~xy ¼v lk 2½ ds ?kj ds Hkhrj Fkk rFkk mlus gh izse esa foQyrk dk izfr‘kks/k ysus ds fy, iqf=;ksa dh gR;k dhA

        ¿ iSjk 2À

       vfHkfu/kkZfjr % ge ;g vfHkys[k xr djus dk etcwj gSa fd nksuksa fupys U;k;ky;ksa }kjk] vihykFkhZ ds nks"k ds ckjs esa fu"d"kZ vfHkfyf[kr djus ls iwoZ lkexzh dk oLrqiwjd] Lora= rFkk fujis{k fo‘ys"k.k ;k fu/kkZj.k fd, fcuk] igys vihykFkhZ ds nks"k dh mi/kkj.kk dj rRi‘pkr~ ,slk fu"d"kZ U;k;ksfpr Bgjkus ds fy, dksbZ&u&dksbZ dkj.k fudyus dk iz;Ru djus dh ,d&gh xaHkhj xyrh dh xbZ gSA fupys U;k;ky;ksa }kjk viukbZ xbZ fopkj dh jhfr esa fojks/kkRed ekud ;k ekunaM rFkk lqlaxfr dk vHkko lqLi"V gSA lk{; ds ewY;kadu esa ;g bruk izR;{kr% ns[kk tk ldrk gS fd egRoghu ckrsa vlE;d~ :i ls c<k&p<+k dj dgh xbZ gS rFkk xaHkhj yksi vkSj egRoiw.kZ lkexzh rFkk lqlaxr lk{khx.k dks jksdus dk egRo bl rF; ds ckotwn vuqfpr :i ls de fd;k x;k gS fd ml lkexzh ds is‘k fd, tkus ij vihykFkhZ dk nks"k vFkok vU;Fkk fuf‘pr :i ls fu;r djus esa rFkk bl fo"k; dss ckjs esa okLrfod lR; mn~?kkfVr djus esa lgk;rk gksrhA ------- gekjk ;g Hkh –f"Vdks.k gS fd bl ekeys ifjfLFkfr;k¡ fl) djus ds fy, ft lansgtud rFkk ‘kadkLin iz—fr ds lk{; ds voyacu dh bZIlk dh xbZ gS og Lo;a xaHkhj ‘kSfFkY; ls rFkk fof/kd fo‘oluh;rk ds vHkko ls xzLr gS ftlls og U;k;ky;ksa esa Lohdk;Z ugha gS] D;ksafd ftu ikfjfLFkfr;ksa ds voyacu dh bZIlk dh xbZ gS muls Lo;a ls ‘k`a[kyk dh ,d ;k ,dkf/kd NqV&iqV ifjfLFkfr dh fo|ekurk vFkok mlds lcwr dk xaHkhj :i ls vk/kkj u"V gksrh gS] dM+h bl izdkj VwVrh ;k foLFkkfir gksrh gS fd ifjfLFkfr;ksa dh ‘k`[kayk esa dM+h ,sls vuqRØe.kh; :i ls VwVrh gS fd vihykFkhZ ds nks"k dh oS/k mi/kkj.kk djus ds fy, vko‘;d vk/kkj i;kZIr :i ls xfBr vFkok miyC/k djkus ds fy, muesa ls fdlh ,d ;k vf/kd dfM+;ksa ij Hkh vdsys fopkj djuk] dfBu] vuqi;qDr gksus ds lkFk&gh vlaHko Hkh gks tkrk gSA mPp U;k;ky; dk fu.kZ; myVk x;kA ¿ iSjk 15À

       ¼2½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 3 && ikfjfLFkfrd lk{; dh iz—fr && ;g nf‘kZr djus ds fy, ifjfLFkfr;ksa dh ‘k`a[kyk lkfcr dh tkuk pkfg, fd lc ekuoh; vf/klaHkkO;rkvksa esa og dk;Z vfHk;qDr }kjk gh fd;k x;k gksxkA

       ;g Lej.k j[kuk mfpr gksxk fd ftu ekeyksa esa lk{; ikfjfLFkfrd Lo:i dk gS] ogk¡ ftu ikfjfLFkfr;ksa ls nksf"krk dk fu"d"kZ fudkyuk gS og izFker% iw.kZr% fl) gksuk pkfg, rFkk bl izdkj fl) lc rF; dsoy vfHk;qDr ds nks"k dh izkDdYiuk ls laxr gksuk pkfg,A fQj] ifjfLFkfr;k¡ fu‘pk;d iz—fr RkFkk izo`fÙk dh gksuk pkfg, rFkk og ,slh gksuk pkfg, ftuls] ftls lkfcr fd;k tkuk izLrkfor gS mls NksM+ dj izR;sd izkDdYiuk vioftZr gksA vU; ‘‘kCnksa esa] ifjfLFkfr;ksa dh bruh iw.kZ ‘k`[kayk gksuk gksxh ftlls vfHk;qDr dh funksZf"krk ls laxr fu"d"kZ ds fy, ;qfDr;qDr vk/kkj ugha cps rFkk og ,slh gksuk gksxh ftlls nf‘kZr gks fd lc ekuoh; vf/klaHkkO;rkvksa esa og dk;Z vfHk;qDr }kjk gh fd;k x;k gksxkA , vkb vkj 1952 ,l lh 343] ¼1838½ 2 ysfou 227] ¼2002½ 1 ,l lh lh 679 rFkk ¼2002½ 1 ,l lh lh 702 voyafcrA

        ¿ iSjk 6À

       ¼3½ nakfMd izFkk && nkafMd fof/k ds iz;ksx esa ewy rFkk vk/kkjHkwr mi/kkj.kk && vfHkdfFkr vfHk;qDr dh funksZf"krk dh gS && lansg ek= fof/kd lcwr ds fy, izHkkoh vuqdYi ugha gSA

       lR; dh okLrfodrk ls i`Fkd~] nkafMd fof/k ds iz;ksx rFkk U;k;nku iz.kkyh esa ewy ;k vk/kkjHkwr mi/kkj.kk vfHkdfFkr vfHk;qDr dh funksZf"krk dh gS rFkk tc rd vkjksi Li"V] rdZiw.kZ] fo‘oluh; vFkok vuf/k{ksi.kh; lk{; ds vk/kkj ij ;qfDr;qDr lansg ls ijs lkfcr ugha gks tkrs] rc rd vijk/k dh t?kU; iz—fr ls vFkok ftl ohHkRl jhfr esa vijk/k fd;k x;k ik;k] dsoy mlls izHkkfor gks dj vfHk;qDr dks vH;kjksfir vFkok nafMr djus dk iz‘u mn~Hkwr ugha gksrkA dsoy lansg] og fdruk Hkh izcy vFkok laHkkO; D;ksa ugha gks] fof/kd lcwr ds fy, izHkkoh vuqdYi ugha gSA mPp U;k;ky; dk fu.kZ; myVk x;kA ¿ iSjk 8À

       ¼4½ nakfMd fopkj.k && vfHk;qDr dh v¡xqfy;ksa ds fpà is‘k ugha fd, x, && Loar= lk{kh ;|fi ukfer rFkkfi ijhf{kr ugha && vfHk;qDr ds vU;= gksus ds vfHkokd~ ij vfHkfyf[kr lk{khx.k dk lk{; is‘k ugha fd;k x;k && lh vkb Mh }kjk Loar= vUos"k.k fd;k x;k ijarq izks)r djus ds ckotwn is‘k ugha fd;k x;k && ,sls rF;ksa ls nf‘kZr fd vUos"k.k rFkk vfHk;kstu fujis{k ugha Fkk rFkk okLrfod rF; U;k;ky; ls fNik, x,A mPp U;k;ky; dk fu.kZ; myVk x;kA ¿ iSjk 9À

       ¼5½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 8 && gsrqd && e`rd ds lkFk vfHk;qDr&vihykFkhZ ds izse laca/k esa foQyrk gksuk lkfcr && isze laca/k dk izR;k[;ku vfHk;qDr }kjk] e`rd }kjk rFkk e`rd ds firk }kjk Hkh && fl[kk, x, lk{kh ds lk{; ds vk/kkj ij ,sls laaca/k dh mi/kkj.kk ugha dh tk ldrhA ¿ iSjk 10À

       ¼6½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 60 && ftu lk{khx.k }kjk vfHk;qDr dks ns[kk tkuk vfHkdfFkr && ?kVuk ds cgqr ckn esa ijhf{kr && lk{kh us e`rd dk fpYykuk lquk ijarq us mlds mÙkj esa dqN fd;k] u fdlh vU; O;fDr dks gh crk;k && fo‘okl;ksX; ugha && lk{; ds ,sls l`tu ls vfHk;qDr ds vU;= gksus ds vfHkokd~ dks cy izkIr gksrk gSA

        ¿ iSjk 11À

       ¼7½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 101 && vfHk;qDr }kjk vU;= gksus dk nkok && leFkZu esa lk{khx.k dh ijh{kk Hkh dh && vUos"k.k fd;k x;k ijarq lk{; is‘k ugha fd;k x;k] cfYd jksdk x;k && fof/kekU; dkj.k crk, fcuk izfrj{kki{k ds lk{khx.k ij vfo‘okl ugha fd;k tk ldrkA mPp U;k;ky; dk fu.kZ; myVk x;kA ¿ iSjk 11À

       ¼8½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 137¼6½ rFkk 133 && f‘kdk;r fd, tkus ij lh vkb Mh }kjk vUos"k.k fd;k x;k && lk{kh ds :i eas ukfer lh vkb Mh vf/kdkjh ijhf{kr ugha && vUos"k.k fjiksVZ Hkh Qkby ls gVk yh xbZ && vfHk;qDr ls ,sls vf/kdkfj;ksa ds vkpj.k ds ckjs esa iz‘u ugha fd, tkuk pkfg, FksA ¿ iSjk 11À

       ¼9½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 27 && vfHk;qDr ds dCts ls vk;q/k] oL= rFkk Lo.kZ&gkj dh cjkenxh && lansgkLin && fo‘okl ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¿ iSjk 12À

       ¼10½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 9 && oLrq dk ‘kuk[r && ftu oLrqvksa ds lkFk fefJr og le:i ugha && ‘kuk[r ij fo‘okl ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¿ iSjk 13À