LexPOORANMAL versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2026] 3 S.C.R. 314 : 2026 INSC 217 Pooranmal v. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 1266 of 2026) 10 March 2026 [Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta* and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the conviction of the appellant-P based solely on circumstantial evidence as convicted by the trial court and upheld by the High Court could be sustained in law. Whether the incriminating evidence are proved by cogent and admissible evidence, forming an unbroken chain pointing unequivocally towards the guilt of the appellant. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302/34, 201 – Bhartatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – ss.103(1)/3(5) – Circumstantial evidence – Recoveries – Appellant-P along with one L, committed murder of wife of L – Appellant-P and L were convicted by the trial Court for the offence punishable u/ss.302/34 and s.201 of the Penal Code, 1860 – The common appeal preferred by the accused persons against their conviction was rejected by the High Court – SLP filed by L was dismissed by this Court in limine – The appellant-P who was unable to prefer an appeal owing to poverty and lack of access to legal assistance, has now filed the present appeal through legal aid – Interference warranted or not: Held: As emerging from the impugned judgments of the trial Court and the High Court, the case of the prosecution pertaining to the murder is based purely on circumstantial evidence viz. call detail records, recovery of blood-stained shirt and the recovery of currency notes – The law governing cases resting on circumstantial evidence is no longer res integra – Mere recovery of currency notes, in the absence of any cogent evidence establishing a clear nexus between the said amount and the crime, would not by itself constitute an incriminating circumstance against the appellant – The said circumstance was wrongly treated to be incriminating by the * Author [2026] 3 S.C.R. 315 Pooranmal v. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. trial Court as the recovery itself is doubtful and additionally, the mere recovery of currency notes cannot constitute incriminating evidence in absence of corroborative evidence – The second incriminating article recovered was blood-stained shirt – Even if the FSL report shows that the blood found on the shirt allegedly recovered at the instance of the appellant matches that of the deceased, such finding would by itself not be incriminating in the absence of other cogent and corroborative evidence completing the chain of circumstances – The last and final piece of circumstantial evidence is call details records – In the present case, the certificate u/s.65-B of the Evidence Act [s.63 of the BSA] was not proved by the prosecution – In the absence of the certificate, mandatorily required u/s.65-B of the Evidence Act [s.63 of the BSA], the call detail records become inadmissible in evidence and cannot be relied upon to support the prosecution’s case – The prosecution has miserably failed to establish a complete and coherent chain of incriminating circumstances so as to bring home the guilt of the appellant – Thus, the conviction of the appellant as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court cannot be sustained – The impugned judgments are hereby set aside. [Paras 26, 27, 33, 52-55] Case Law Cited Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra [1985] 1 SCR 88 : (1984) 4 SCC 116; Karandeep Sharma alias Razia alias Raju v. State of Uttarakhand [2025] 3 SCR 1482 : 2025 SCC OnLine SC 773; Allarakha Habib Memon v. State of Gujarat [2024] 8 SCR 345 : (2024) 9 SCC 546; Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer [2014] 11 SCR 399 : (2014) 10 SCC 473; Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal [2020] 7 SCR 180 : (2020) 7 SCC 1 – relied on. List of Acts Penal Code 1860; Evidence Act, 1872; Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Bhartatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. List of Keywords Circumstantial evidence; Chain of custody; Corroborative evidence; Unbroken chain of custody; Call details records; Recovery of blood-stained cloth; Recovery of currency notes; 316 [2026] 3 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Electronic evidence; Requirement of certificate u/s.65-B of Evidence Act; Admissibility of electronic evidence; Coherent chain of incriminating circumstances. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 1266 of 2026 From the Judgment and Order dated 16.03.2018
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.