GANPAT SINGH versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: [2017] 9 S.C.R. 706 · Decided: 19-09-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.V. RAMANA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
[2017) 9 S.C.R. 706 
GANPAT SINGH 
v. 
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 
(Criminal Appeal No. 630 of2009) 
SEPTEMBER 19,2017 
[N. V. RAMANA ANU DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.f 
Penal Code, 1860 - s. 302 - Dead body found in a dry well 
- identified to be that of PW-4 '.~ mother - Appellant absconded 
immediately aper the incident - Trial Court found appellant guilty 
entirely 011 basis of circumstantial evidence - High Court affirmed 
the conviction of the appellant - On appeal, held: There is manifest 
error on the part of the High Court in holding that the body of the 
deceased was recovered at the instance of the appellant - The 
appellant was arrested several months after the recovery of the body 
D - Hence, the recove1:v of the body could not have been (and was 
not) at his instance - The mere circumstance that the appellant was 
last seen with the deceased is an unsafe hypothesis to found a 
conviction on a charge of murder in instant case - The lapse of time 
between the point when the appellant was last seen with deceased 
E 
F 
and the time of death is not minimal - The time of death was 
estimated to be between two tO'four weeks prior to the recove1y of 
the body - insofar, the testimony of son of deceased, that appellant 
informed him that deceased had stayed back - This coupled with 
the fact that the appellant had absconded after the date of the 
incident is a strong suspicion that the appellant was responsible for 
the·death - However, a strong suspicion in itself is not s11f.flcient to 
lead to the conclusion that the guilt of the appellant stands 
established beyond reasonable doubt -
There are material 
contradictions in the case of the prosecution - The prosecution fi1i!ed 
to establish a complete chain of circumstances and to exclude 
G every hypothesis other than the guilt of the appellant. 
H 
The case of the prosecution is that a dead body was found in a 
dry well. The body was identified to be of PW-4's mother. Based on 
circumstaptial evidence the Sessions Judge found the Appellant guilty 
u/s. 302 of the IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. 
706 
GANPAT SINGH v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 
707 
The High Court did not rely upon the alleged recove1y of the 
A 
silver ornaments which was a material circumstance which the Sessions 
Judge had found to link the Appellant with the murder. Nonetheless, 
:::::11three circumstances weighed with the High Court in affirming the 
-conviction of the Appellant, viz. (i) deceased was last seen in the company 
-of the accused; (ii) the accused made false statement to the son of the 
deceased Rakesh (PW-4) that her mother had gone to the maternal 
B 
aunt; (iii) the body of the deceased was recovered at the instance·ofthe 
accused. Hence, the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 There are no eye-witnesses to the crime. In a c 
case which rests on circumstantial evidence, the law postulates a 
two-fold requirement. First, every link in the chain. of 
circumstances necessary to establish the guilt of the accused must 
be established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. 
Second, all the circumstances must be consistent only with the 
guilt of the accused. [Para 91 f711-F-Gf 
· 
D 
1.2 The case of the prosecution is riddled with unexplained 
contradictions, PWland PW2 were crucial_ to the case of the 
prosecution for establishing that the deceased had visited them 
and that they had lent her silver ornaments ostensibly because 
she intended to arrange the engagement of her son PW4. 
Admittedly, neither PWl nor PW2 were called· upon to identify 
the jewellery alleged to have been recovered from the house of 
the Appellant. PWl stated that the jewellery \\~hich she had lent 
., 
weighed more than half a kg. PW2 deposed that the ornaments 
which she had lent weighed about 1.25 kgs. In the course of her 
cross-examination, PWl stated that it was true that the ornaments 
which she had lent were commonly worn by women in the villages. 
PW2 also admitted that there were no identification mar.ks on 
the ornaments and they were of a nature that is commonly used. 
PWS, the daughter of the deceased, had (as 'the High Court 
observed) no opportunity to observe the ornaments on the person 
of the deceased. The ornaments had no special mark.s of 
identification. PWS materially improved upon her version during · 
the course of the examination. On this state of the evidence, the 
recovery 9f the silver ornaments (which was an important lin

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.