NEW DELHI, Mar 2: The Supreme Court has acquitted a woman from Haryana who was awarded life-term in a 23-year-old murder case of a minor.
A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal acquitted the woman after finding fault with the version of the prosecution and the finding of conviction recorded by the trial court on the basis of recovery of weapon ‘gandasi’ (axe), which was upheld by the High Court.
“In our considered view, both the courts have committed an error in placing substantial reliance upon a mere recovery of the weapon, while the body of the deceased was found much earlier and that too, not at the instance of the appellant. Thus, we are constrained to extend the benefit of doubt to the appellant,” the bench said as it allowed the woman’s appeal, challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order.
The bench agreed with the submission of the counsel appearing for the accused that motive does assume some relevance in a case involving circumstantial evidence.
“Herein, there is no evidence to show that the deceased was last seen with the appellant. As stated, it is not even the case of the prosecution that the appellant was seen with the deceased just before his death. Mere recovery of the material object in the form of a ‘gandasi’, by itself, cannot be the sole basis to convict the appellant,” the bench noted in its February 20 order.
It said there is no fingerprint of the appellant on the material object recovered and in any case, the evidence is inadequate to conclusively show that the weapon recovered was used for committing the offence.
The bench noted that the recovery of the body of the deceased was also not made at the instance of the appellant.
“Suspicion, however strong, cannot be the basis for conviction. It is also not known as to how the appellant was made to confess, as there is no clarity with regard to the circumstances under which the statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 was obtained from the appellant. Suffice it is to state that the materials presented by the prosecution are not sufficient enough to unerringly point out the guilt on the part of the appellant alone,” the bench said in its order.
According to the prosecution, the murder took place on December 11, 2002 and a complaint was lodged on December 12, 2002 alleging that a four and half years old son of the complainant had gone missing.
The prosecution said that upon a search being conducted, the child’s dead body was found in the village well situated nearby and it was discovered during the investigation that it was the appellant who had allegedly committed the offence as recovery of the weapon (axe) having blood stain was made on her instance.
The top court recorded that the recovery was of a ‘gandasi’, the weapon allegedly used by the appellant for committing the offence but the Serological Report was inconclusive with respect to whether the bloodstains on the recovered weapon matched with that of the deceased.
The complainant said that the woman was suffering from depression at the moment and the accused woman also made a statement to that effect before the trial court at the time of sentencing.
The top court recorded that though a motive has been alleged to the effect that the children of the appellant were being beaten up by the mother of the deceased, it is not in dispute that even at the relevant point of time, the appellant was a middle-aged lady and her children were major, while the deceased was only four and a half years old. (PTI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
