LexSATHYA NARAYANAN versus STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 10 S.C.R. 950 A SATHYA NARAYANAN B V. STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE (Criminal Appeal No. 1539 of 2008 etc.) NOVEMBER 2, 2012 [P. SATHASIVAM AND RANJAN GOGOi, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 3021149 and 201 - Murder - 12 accused - Circumstantial evidence - Deceased last seen c together with the accused - Motive - Witnesses fuming hostile - Delay in lodging FIR - Trial court acquitting 6 accused, and convicting rest 6 accused - Appeal by the 6 convicts - During pendency thereof, 2 convicts died, hence appeal abated against them - High Court confirming the conviction of the 0 other 4 convicts (appellants) - On appeal, held: Conviction justified - The circumstances complete the chain of link and establish that in all probability the act must have been done by the appellants-accused - As the deceased was last seen with the accused, burden to prove as to what happened to the ·E deceased was on the accused, which they failed - Case cannot be rejected on the ground of delay in lodging FIR as the same has been explained - Reliance placed on certain statements of hostile witnesses by courts below is acceptable. Witness - Hostile witness - Evidentiary value and F reliance on - Held: Evidence of hostile witness cannot be rejected in toto - It can be relied upon to the extent it supports the prosecution case. The appellants-accused alongwith 11 others were G prosecuted for having killed one woman. The prosecution case was that accusea No. 1 (appellant No. 1 in Criminal Appeal No. 1573), in order to lead a spiritual life, deserted her husband and started running an Ashram and lived there with her son (accused No. 4). Accused No. 2 H 950 SATHYA NARAYANAN v. STATE REP. BY 951 INSPECTOR OF POLICE became a member of the Ashram and started living there A with his son (accused No.3) and daughter (accused No.7). Accused No. 1 and accused No. 2 developed illicit intimacy. The deceased who had initially come to take tuitions of the children of accused Nos. 1 and 2, later became member of the Trust and started looking after the B accounts of the Ashram. The deceased also developed illicit intimacy with accused No.2. The deceased was demanding share in the property of the Ashram from accused No. 1 or else she would disclose her illicit intimacy with accused No. 2. On the day of the incident, c accused No. 1 alongwith other accused, assembled at the back side of the temple and started beating the deceased. Accused No. 1 strangulated the deceased which resulted in her death. FIR was lodged by PW-1, nine days after the day of the incident. Trial court acquitted accused Nos. 6 0 to 11, convicted accused Nos. 1 to 5 u/ss. 302 r/w. s.149 and 201 IPC and convicted accused No. 12 u/s. 201 IPC. The convicted accused filed appeal. During pendency of the appeal accused Nos. 2 and 12 died and the appeal abated against them. High Court dismissed the appeal, E confirming the conviction. In appeals to this Court, appel.lants-accused contended that there was no eye-witness to the incident; that there was delay in lodging FIR; that prosecution witnesses turned hostile and evidence of PWs 1 and 2 F were not accepted in toto by courts below and hence their evidence was not acceptable. Therefore, the appellants could not have been convicted. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. When in the absence of eye-witness, if various circumstances relied on by the prosecution relating to the guilt are fully established beyond doubt, the court is free to award conviction. Further, the chain G of events must be complete in order to sustain the H 952 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 10 S.C.R. A conviction on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Though there is no direct evidence about'the cause of death, various circumstances projected by the prosecution complete the chain of link and establish that, in all probability, the act must have been done by the s appellants. [Paras 13 and 33] [961-C; 973-F] Hanumant vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 1952 SCR 1091; Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 sec 116: 1985 (1) SCR 88 - relied on. C 2. Though the High Court disbelieved the version of PW-1 as to the illegal intimacy between A-1 and A-2 and A-2 and the deceased, the reasons furnished by him for the delay in lodging the complaint after 9 days are acceptable. Inasmuch as the entire episode has took D place within the Ashram, PW-1 who worked in the Ashram 9 mo
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.