LexASRAF SK AND ANR. versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 14 S.C.R. 750 A ASRAF SK AND ANR. II. STATE OF WEST BENGAL (Criminal Appeal No. 720 of 2004) B OCTOBER 20, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.] --i...,. Penal Code, 1860 - s. 302 rlw s. 34 - Conviction under, c by Courts below-Based on circumstantial evidence - Justifi- cation of - On facts, held: Not justified - Evidence of deceased's daughters, on which strong reliance was placed by Courts below, full of contradictions - Circumstances not pointing to guilt of the accused. D According to the prosecution, the two Appellants alongwith another person murdered the father of PWs 1 and 2 by throttling and torturing him. Earlier the Appel- lants had allegedly kidnapped the daughter of PW2 and r had also threatened to kill the entire family of the deceased. E Shortly before the incident all the accused were seen fol- lowing the deceased. The Trial Court convicted the appellants under s.302 r.w. s.34 IPC but acquitted the third accused. The convic- F tion of the Appellants was upheld by the High Court. Hence the present appeal. Allowing the appeal, the Court ). HELD:1.1. Where a case rests squarely on circum- stantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified G only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are founq to be incompatible with the innocence of the -l accused or the guilt of any other person. The circum- stances from which an inference as to the guilt of the ac- I._/ cused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable .. H 750 ... ASRAF SK AND ANR. v. STATE OF 751 WEST BENGAL doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with A the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circum- stances. [Para 5] [755,C-E] 1.2. The Trial Court and the High Court held that the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 can be acted upon and, there- fore, the circumstances were established. However, in the 8 opinion of this Court the circumstances do not present a complete chain of circumstances. The evidence of PWs 1 and 2 on which strong reliance has been placed by the trial Court and the High Court are full of contradictions . PW-1 stated that she had seen the actual assault. This C was her statement in Court which is contrary to her state- ment recorded during investigation. In the FIR there was also no reference that PWs 1 and 2 had seen the actual occurrence. PW-2's version is entirely different. The present case is certainly not a case where the prosecu- D tion has established the accusations. The accused per- sons are entitled to acquittal. [Paras 15, 16, 17] [759,D-F; __,,, 760,A; 760,D] Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan AIR (1977) SC 1063; E Eradu and Ors. v. State of Hyderabad AIR (1956) SC 316; Earabhadrappa v. State of Kamataka AIR (1983) SC 446; State of UP v. Sukhbasi and Ors. AIR (1985) SC 1224; Ba/winder Singh v. State of Punjab AIR (1987) SC 350; Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of MP AIR (1989) SC 1890; Bhagat Ram v. State of Punjab AIR (1954) SC 621; C. Chenga Reddy F and Ors. v. State of A.P (1996) 10 SCC 193; Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P and Ors. AIR (1990) SC 79; State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava (1992) Crl.LJ 1104; Hanumant Govind Nargundkar and Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR (1952) SC 343; Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. G State of Maharashtra AIR (1984) SC 1622; State of Rajasthan _,.-p-- v. Rajaram (2003) 8 SCC 180 State of Haryana v. Jagbir Singh and Anr. (2003) 11 sec 261 and Chatter Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana [Criminal Appeal No.180/2001 disposed of by S.C. on 26th August, 2008] - relied on. H 752 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 14 S.C.R. A Circumstantial Evidence by Alfred Wills (Chapter VI) - ~ referred to. CASE LAW REFERENCE AIR (1977) SC 1063 relied on Para 5 B AIR (1956) SC 316 relied on Para 5 AIR (1983) SC 446 relied on Para 5 ·-,L.,< AIR (1985) SC 1224 relied on Para 5 AIR (1987) SC 350 relied on Para 5 c AIR (1989) SC 1890 relied on Para 5 AIR (1954) SC 621 relied on Para 5 (1996) 10 sec 193 relied on Para 6 AIR (1990) SC 79 relied on Para 7- D (1992) Crl.LJ 1104 relied on Para 8 AIR (1952) SC 343 relied on Para 11 \. y AIR (1984) SC 1622 relied on Para 12 E (2003) 8 sec 1 ao relied on Para 13 c2003} 11 sec 261 relied on Para 13 CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 720 of 2004 F From the final Judgment and Order dated 8.10.2002 of the High Court of Calcutta at Calcutta in Crl. Appeal No. 399 of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.