PRAKASH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Citation: [2013] 2 S.C.R. 458 · Decided: 22-03-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. SATHASIVAM, J.S. KHEHAR · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2013] 2 S.C.R. 458 
A 
PRAKASH 
B 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
(Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 2008 etc.) 
MARCH 22, 2013. 
[P. SATHASIVAM AND JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.] 
PENAL CODE, 1860: 
C 
ss. 302, 364 and 120-B - Minor boy kidnapped and 
murdered by three accused - Circumstantial evidence -
Conviction and $entence of life imprisonment - Affirmed by 
High Courl - Held: Cogent and acceptable evidence adduced 
by prosecution has established the deceased last seen with 
accused, recovery of incriminating articles pursuant to 
D disclosure statements of accused, motive for the crime, i.e. 
enmity between complaint and accused and threat given by 
accused to finish the family of complainant - It leads to a 
conclusion that appellants/accused kidnapped and murdered 
the deceased - Conviction and sentence upheld - Evidence 
E - Circumstantial evidence - Motive. 
The minor son of PW-1 left for school on 15.4.1908, 
as usual, but did not return. On 19.4.1998 his dead-body 
was found on a hillock. The investigation culminated in 
F a charge sheet being filed against A-1, A-2 and A-3 for 
offences punishable ulss 302, 364 and 120-B IPC. The 
trial court convicted the accused of the offences charged 
and sentenced each of them, inter alia, to imprisonment 
for life. The High Court affirmed the conviction and the 
G sentences. Only A-2 and A-3 filed the appeals. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The prosecution case rests solely on the 
circumstantial evidence. In Sharad Birdhichand Sharda's 
H 
458 
PRAKASH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
459 
case, this Court has laid down golden principles of A 
standard of proof in a case of circumstantial evidence. 
The relevant and material circumstances heavily relied on 
by the prosecution are: (i) The deceased was last seen 
in the company of the appellants-accused; (ii) Recow~ry 
of incriminating articles in pursuance of the information 
B 
given by the appellants; and (iii) motive. [para 4-6] [462-
F; 463-A-B; 464-D-F] 
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra, 
1985 (1) SCR 88 = (1984) 4 sec 116 - relied on. 
c 
1.2 With regard to the last seen theory, prosecution 
examined three persons, namely, PW-3, PW-4 (both 
goldsmiths) and PW-10. PW-3 has stated that he was 
known to complainant, A-1 and A-2. 
He further stated 
that on the date of the incident at about 12 he had seen 
D 
all the accused persons on a scooter and the son of the 
complainant sitting in between the three accused 
persons on the scooter. PW-4 has stated that on the date 
of the incident at about 12.15 he had seen the accused 
moving in a scooter along with the small boy. Further, 
E 
PW-10 stated that on 15.4.2008 (the date of incident), he 
saw the accused along with a boy moving towards the 
Hillock. He stated that he was known to all the three 
accused persons and the child. He was cross-examined 
at length but nothing was elicited disproving his 
F 
statement. The prosecution very much relied on PWs 3, 
4 and 10 to prove the last seen theory and the courts 
below rightly accepted their version. This Court is 
satisfied that the prosecution has succeeded in 
establishing the circumstance of last seen theory. [para 
G 
11-12] [467-G-H; 468-A-E] 
1.3 In the course of investigation and in pursuance 
of the information given by A-1, his pant and shirt stained 
with blood were recovered from his house in the 
H 
460 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013] 2 S.C.R. 
A presence of PWs 21 and 23. As per FSL report, the stains 
of blood on the pant and shirt are of human origin. [para 
15] (469-C-D] 
1.4 The analysis of the evidence, particularly the 
B evidence o PW-1 and his wife PW-7, clearly shows that 
the prosecution has succeeded in establishing that the 
relations betweens the family of the complainant and the 
appellants-accused were hostile. In fact one of the 
accused had threatened the complainant and his wife of 
C finishing their family. On the date her son went missing 
she had seen the three accused with a scooter near her 
house. This Court is satisfied that the prosecution has 
proved motive on the part of the appellants for committing 
the murder of the son of PWs 1 and 7. (para 13] (468-F-G] 
D 
1.5 In the facts and circumstances, this Court holds 
that the prosecution has established all the 
circumstances by cogent and acceptable evidence and 
it leads to a conclusion that it were the appellants/ 
accused who kidnapped and committed the murder of 
E the deceased. The trial court has rightly accepted 

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