RATAN GOND versus THE STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [1959] 1 S.C.R. 1336 · Decided: 19-09-1958 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SYED JAFFER IMAM, S.K. DAS, J.L. KAPUR · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
• , 
1336 
StTPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1959] 
r958 
This wrapper had blood-stains. They (l;itre too sma.11 
B . . 
. 
in quantity to enable a. S@rologist to determine their 
tpon /Jtloa" 
• • 
b 
• • 
k Ll 
h 
h 
h bl d 
SarAar & 
Another Or11pn, Ut It IS rema.r a .. e t at W ere\·er t 0 
00 • 
v. 
sta.ms were found on the wrapper a.n a.tternpt had 
The State of 
been ma.de t-0 burn out those ma.rks. 
Unfortunately, 
Wtst Bencal 
for the a.ppella.nt, his attempt to burn out th•3 bl<iod-
Imam ]. 
Stplrmbtf' r9 
• 
• 
stains on the wrapper was not entirely successful. 
This was, in our opinion, an incriminating circum-
stance against this appellant. 
Tho circumstantial 
evidence taken as a whole leaves no room for 1~ reason-
able doubt in our minds about the guilt of th is appel-
lant. 
In our opinion, the High Court rightly found the 
appellants guilty under s. 302/34 of the lndiim Penal 
Code. It could not be said that the sentence of death. 
for a. murder of the kind proved in this case was un-
duly severe. The appeals a.re accordingly dismisser!. 
Appeals dismi8sed . 
• 
• 
RATAN GOND 
v. 
THE STATE 01'' BIHAR 
(JAFER IMAM, S. K. DAS and J. L. KAPUR JJ.) 
Jo:videncc-Statemwt of dt'ad person 11ot made in j"dicial pro-
ceeding or to puso" at4lhorised nor relating to the cause of hts death-
Admis~ibility-Co,.fession-Perso" in authority- Cir.:umstantial 
t:vidence-Use in corroboration of confession-/11dian Ei·ide1Ju Act, 
(/ of 1872), ss. 24, 32 and 33. 
The appellant was charged with the murder of a girl 
Haisakhi. On information gi,·cn by Aghani, younger sister of 
the deceased, the headless body of the decease<! was re-
covered. The "appellant absconded but was found ;n another 
village and was brought back by 
the village voluTlteer 
force. 
On interrogation by the 
~lakhia, Sarpanch and a 
panch of the Gram Panchayat the appellant mad< an extra-
ju<licial confessi'on. 
A blood-stained cutting ."'c~pon was rep 
covered fronra room of the appellant. At 111s mslance some 
sttands of hair \Vere recovered from a place at• a short •distance 
• 
. 
~ 
,. 
~··· 
,· . 
• • 
' • 
S.C.R. 
SUPR!j:ME COURT REPORTS 
1337 
from the plac"> "'11.ere the dead ·body had been recovered, which 
were stained with human blood i-nd appeared to be scalp hair of 
a human female. The appef!ant jVaS convicted and sentenced to 
Ratan Gond 
death and the High Court upheld the conviction and sentence. 
v. 
. 
The Courts took into consideration the statements made by Th• Stats 0! Bthor 
·Aghani to her mother and io other persons that the deceased 
wa~ last seen in the company of the appellant. Aghani, however, 
died before her statement could be recorded in a judicial proceed-
ing. It was contended by the appellant that the statements 
of Aghani were inadmissible, that the extra-judicial confession 
was not relevant and that the circumstantial evidence was not 
sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellant. 
Held, that the statements of Aghani were not admissible 
either under s. 32 or s .. 33 of the Evidence Act. Section 33 had 
no application as her statement was not made in any judicial 
proceeding or before any person authorised by law to record the 
same. The statements did not relate to the cause of her death 
•or to any circumstances relating to her death but related to the 
death of her sister and did not fall under cl. r of s. 32 which 
was the only clause which could have any bearing on the 
question. 
Held, further, that though having regard to the Bihar 
Panchayat Raj Act, the Mukhia, Sarpanch and panch of the 
• Gram Panch~yat to whom the extra-judicial confession was made 
were persons in authority within the meaning of s. 24 Evidence 
Act, no. threat, promise or inducement for making the confession 
was proved. The facts that the appellant was brought back to 
'the Village by the village volunteer force and that it took two 
or three hours before he made the confession do not indicate 
that the confession was not voluntary. Jhere was nothing to 
show that the confession contained any untrue or inaccurate 
statement. The circumstantial evidence may not be sufficient 
by itself to prove the guilt of the appellant, but it afforded 
sufficient corroboration to the confession and the corrobora-
tion was of such a nature as to connect the appellant with the 
murder.• 
CR.IMINAL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION: 
·Criminal 
Appeal No. 76 of 1958. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and 
order dated March 4, 1958, of the Patna High Co

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