LexSAKHARAM versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
SAKHARAM
v.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
FEBRUARY 12, 1992
B
[KULDIP SINGH AND R.M. SAHA!, JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860-Section 302-Conviction 1mder-Abse11ce of motive
in a case of circumstantial evidence-Relevancy of-Accused and deceased
'clrildren' defined in tire Children Act, 1960-J11ve11ile-i1111oce11ce--Presump-
C tion of-Prosecution's duty.
The prosecution's case was that a fe\v days before the incident the
accused-appellant's grand father suffered heart attack and on his
hospitalisation, accused's parents were attending on him:
D
The deceased, who was the aunt of the accused and daughter-in-law
of accused's grand father came to see her ailing father-in-law.
Thereafter the deceased went to her father-in-law's one room house
in the village, where the accused was staying alone and stayed for 8/10 days.
E
The accused was aged about 16 and his aunt, the deceased was aged
F
G
17/18.
On 29.10.1968 at about noon time, the neighbours heard a gun-shot
sound from the accused's house. On reaching the accused's house they
found the deceased lying dead on the Door and a 12 bore gun on the bed.
One of the neighbours was an uncle of the accused, to whom, the
accused told crying, "run uncle what has happened".
The trial Court convicted the appellant for murder and sentenced
him to imprisonment for life.
Accused's appeal was dismissed by the High Court, against which by
special leave this appeal was filed.
Allowing the appeal of the accused, this Court,
H
HELD: 1.01. The appellant was present at the time and place of
638
-
SAKHARAM v. STATE [KULDIP SINGH, J.]
639
,..
occurrence but this circumstance alone is not sufficient to conclude . that A
it was the appellant who fired the gun-shot and he did so with the intention
or killing the deceased. [641F·G]
l.02. There is absolutely no motive on the part of the appellant to
murder the deceased. Absence of motive may not be relevant in a case
B
where the evidence is overwhelming but it is a plus-point for the accused
in a case where the evidence against him is only circumstantial. [642B)
~
1.03. His telling his uncle while crying "run uncle what has happened"
shows that the happening was beyond his comprehension. It could be an
accident while fiddling with the gun. [641H, 642A)
c
1.04. The appellant and the deceased were children as defined under
the Children Act, 1960. When presumption .or juvenile-innocence is sought
to be displaced by the prosecution on the basis of circumstantial-evidence
the circumstances must unmistakably prove the guilt beyond doubt.
[642C) D
...
I.OS. The prosecution has not been able to prove the charge against
the appellant beyond doubt. [642D)
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.
E
370 of 1980.
From the Judgment and Order dated 30.1.1980 of the Madhya
Pradesh High Court in Crl. A. No. 311 of 1973.
.,,
.. ·
T. Sridharan for the Appellant.
F
...
U ma Nath Singh for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
KULDIP SINGH, J. Sakharam and Awadhrani, aged about 16 and G
17118 were together in a one room-house belonging to Sakharam's grand-
father in a village. Awadhrani was married to Sakharam's uncle {father's
younger brother). A gun-shot was heard and the neighbours rushed to the
room. Awadhrani was found lying dead on the floor with a gun-shot injury.
.,.
Sakharam was standing nearby and was crying. On these facts the trial
court convicted Sakharam for the murder of Awadhrani and sentenced him H
640
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1992] 1 S.C.R.
A
to imprisonment for life. His appeal to the High Court was dismissed.
B
c
Hence this appeal via special leave.
The appellant along with his father and grand-father was living in a
village near Jabalpur. Awadhrani was the wife of Govindprasad, uncle of
the appellant. Govindprasad was employed at Bhopal and Awadhrani was
living with him. A few days before the incident appellant's grand-father had
suffered heart attack and was shifted to Jabalpur Medical College.
Appellant's father and mother were attending on his grand father at the
hospital. Awadhrani had come from Bhopal to Jabalpur to see her father-
in-law. She stayed at Jabalpur for about 3/4 days and thereafter went to
the village where the appellant was staying alone in the family house. After
about 8/10 days of stay in the 'illage on October 29, 1968 at about noon
time the neighbours heard a gun-shot sound from the house of the appel-
lant. Mahadeo (PExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.