Murder Circumstantial - Recovery- Medical- Motive- evidence
2022 CRI. L. J. 2133
Air Online 2022 ORI 80
(ORISSA HIGH COURT)
Basudev Soren v. State of Odisha.
C. R. A. No. 113 of 2000,
D/- 23-3-2022.
(A) Penal Code (45 of 1860), S. 302- Evidence Act (1 of 1872), Ss. 3, 118-Murder Circumstantial evidence - Last seen evidence Interested witness Mother of deceased stated that accused came to their house on previous night and asked deceased to accompany him-Mere fact of accused being last seen with de- ceased is not conclusive of guilt-Only one related witness spoke about deceased being last seen with accused Her evi- dence is that of 'interested' witness and not supported by any other witness-Last seen witness never told police that accused called away deceased and her evidence does not inspire confidence In absence of any independent evidence it is difficult to con- clude that link of 'last seen' has been con- vincingly proved-Gap between time when deceased went away and when dead body was discovered was 12 hours This does not rule out possibility of some other per- son being author of crime - Accused is entitled to benefit of doubt.
2014 AIR SCW 2253 and AIR 2005 SC 335, Relied on. (Paras 23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 40)
(B) Penal Code (45 of 1860), S. 302- Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 27 - Murder - Recovery evidence - Weapon of of- fence and wearing apparels of accused al- legedly recovered on basis of recovery statement of accused - Six recovery wit- nesses have turned hostile and stated that that police obtained their signatures on blank papers-They were not present at time of search - It was also incumbent on police to explain injuries on accused. since it happened while accused was in police custody Voluntariness of state- ment of accused leading to discovery of weapon is also therefore doubtful - Ac- cused not proved to have made voluntary statement which led to discovery of weapon of offence Accused entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 30, 31, 34, 40)
(C) Penal Code (45 of 1860), S. 302- Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 45- Murder Medical evidence- Blood-stained hair of deceased did not reveal blood group There was no blood on wearing apparel ofnothing to connect accused with deceased -Accused entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 35, 36, 40)
(D) Penal Code (45 of 1860), S. 302- Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 8- Murder -Motive-Lack of Prosecution mis- erably failed to prove any motive for crime -Evidence of witnesses indicate that ac- cused and deceased were in fact not in- imical to each other - Witnesses stated that they were close friends-Prosecution miserably failed to prove motive and an important link of chain of circumstance is not proved-Accused entitled to benefit of doubt. accused-Nail scrapping of accused which was collected during investigation also. shows no presence of blood There was nothing to connect accused with deceased -Accused entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 35, 36, 40)
(D) Penal Code (45 of 1860), S. 302- Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 8- Murder -Motive-Lack of Prosecution mis- erably failed to prove any motive for crime -Evidence of witnesses indicate that ac- cused and deceased were in fact not in- imical to each other - Witnesses stated that they were close friends-Prosecution miserably failed to prove motive and an important link of chain of circumstance is not proved-Accused entitled to benefit of doubt.
AIR 2012 SC 2657, Relied on. (Paras 38, 40)
Cases Referred:
AIROnline 2021 P and H 1956 2014 AIR SCW 2253 (Rel. on)
AIR 2012 SC 2435
AIR 2012 SC 2657 (Rel. on)
AIR 2005 SC 335
AIR 2005 SC 1000
AIROnline 2003 SC 497
AIR 1997 SC 2193
AIROnline 1994 SC 65
AIR 1991 SC 1388
AIR 1981 SC 765