LexRUMI BORA DUTTA versus STATE OF ASSAM
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2013] 3 S.C.R. 801
RUMI BORA DUTIA
V.
STATE OF ASSAM
(Criminal Appeal No. 737 of 2006 etc.)
MAY 24, 2013
[DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860:
A
B
s.302134 -
Murder -
Circumstantial evidence -
c
Conviction and life sentence awarded by courts below - Held:
The circumstances clearly establish that the prosecution has
proved the guilt of the accused-appellants and the
circumstances are conclusive in nature to exclude every
hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved -
The chain
0
of evidence is absolutely complete -
Conviction and
sentence upheld - Criminal law - Motive - Evidence Act,
1872 - s.27 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.313.
The appellants - the aunt and the nephew - were
prosecuted for causing the death of the bread winner of E
the family. The prosecution case was that on the day of
occurrence, the police learnt about hospitalization of a
person because of bullet injuries. When the police
reached the hospital, they were informed that the victim
was brought dea.d at 1.30 a.m. The police then reached . F
the house of the deceased and finding the narration of
his wife absolutely false, arrested the appellants. In the
investigation, illicit relationship between the two accused-
appellants surfaced. Both of them confessed to the
Investigating Officer, which led to recovery of a knife, a G
skipping rope and its missing handle from the house. The
post-mortem report indicated that the death was caused
by strangulation, and there was no bullet injury on the
·chest but it was a stab injury with a kni'fe. The trial court
801
H
802
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2013] 3 S.C.R.
A convicted both the accused u/s 302/34 IPC and
sentenced them to life imprisonment. The High Court
dismissed their appeal.
B
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1. The whole case of the prosecution rests
on the circumstantial evidence and, as such, it is the duty
of the court to see that the circumstances which lead
towards the guilt of the accused have been fully
established and they must lead to a singular conclusion
C that the accused is guilty of the offence and rule out the
probabilities which are likely to allow the presumption of
innocence of the accused. [para 10] [908-D-F]
Han um ant Govind Nargundkar v. State of M. P. 1952
D SCR 1091 = AIR 1952 SC 343; Sharad Birdhichand Sarda
v. State of Maharashtra 1985 (1) SCR 88 = 1984 (4)
SCC 116; C. Chenga Reddy and Others v. State of A.P. 1996
(3) Suppl. SCR 479 = 1996 (10) SCC 193 - referred to.
1.2. On a studied scrutiny of the evidence on record,
E this Court is convinced that the circumstances that have
been proven are that (i) occurrence took place about 1.30
a.m.; {ii) the deceased was found lying dead on his bed;
(iii) the accused appellants lived with him in his house
and were present at the time the incident took place; (iv)
F accused-appellant (nephew) made a statement u/s 27 of
the Evidence Act and led the police to recover the knife,
the weapon of assault, and the missing handle of the
skipping rope; (v) the skipping rope was found in the bed
room and was recovered at the instance of the wife; (vi)
G the wife of deceased gave a false information and tried
to mislead the police; (vii) she disowned the information
in her statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C; (viii) that the accused
persons had not offered any explanation with regard to
recovery of weapons from their house except making a
H bald denial; (ix) there is evidence on record that the wife
RUMI BORA DUTTA v. STATE OF ASSAM
803
had developed an illicit relationship with the nephew of A
the deceased, which provides a motive; (x) nothing had
been stated in their examination u/s 313 that any one had
any animosity with the deceased; (xi) nothing was stolen
from the house; and (xii) the child (who was stated to
have been taken by miscreants as stated by wife) was
B
immediately found from the road. [para 23] [813-E-H; 814-
A-B]
1.3. Besides, the doctor (PW-6), who conducted the
post-mortem, in his report opined that the cause of death
C
was due to asphyxia following !.trangulation and the
same was caused with a rope. It is further opined that the
injury on the chest of the deceased was caused with
some pointed weapon like dagger. Thus, from the post
mortem report it is manifest that the FIR lodged by the wife
was a maladroit attempt to save her skin. It was totally D
false. [para 9] [808-B-D]
·
State of Maharashtra v. Damu S/o Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.