STATE OF MAHARASHTRA versus SURESH

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 215 · Decided: 10-12-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.T. NANAVATI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

ST A TE OF MAHARASHTRA 
A 
v. 
SURESH 
DECEMBER 10, 1999 
[G.T. NANA VA TI AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.] 
B 
· · Penal Code, 1860 : 
·' 
Sections 302 and 376-Rape and murder' of .minor child-No eye-
witnesses-Reliable and formidable circumstances established by C 
prosecution-Such circumstances forming into complete chain and unerringly 
pointing to the accused-Held, accused guiltY' of said offence-Criminal 
Trial-Circumstantial Evidence. 
'•i 
Criminal Trial-Circumstantial Evidenc.e-Appreciation of- D 
Incriminating material recovered at the instance of a,ccused-No explanation 
offered by accused about source of such knowledge-Effect of-Held, 
presumption arises against accused that concealment made by him only--
False answer by accused to an incriminating circumstance-Held, . such 
circumstance capable of inculpating him-False answer providing a missing 
link for completing the chain. 
E 
Prosecution charged respondent-accused with rape and murder of four 
year old female child whose house he frequently visited as her uncle was his 
acquaintance. Trial court convicted respondent and imposed death sentence 
for the said offence on the ground that after visit of respondent on the fateful 
l 
' 
. 
' 
. 
day, the child disappeared; that PWs. 3, 8 and 14 saw respondent with female F 
child on the fateful day and also identified respondent in test identification 
parade; that respondent after.arrest took police to the spot wherefrom dead 
body of the child was recovered; that post-mortem report indicated injuries 
on her private parts and that death was due to asphyxia caused by rape and 
smothering; that medical examination of respondent by doctor revealed G 
injuries on his male organ; and that stains of blood and semen were detected 
on under-clothes of accused when he was arrested. 
Ii 
In appeal, High Court acquitted respondent on the ground that evidence 
I 
. 
. 
l 
o,fthree witn~sses, PWs-3, 8 and 14, who h~d seen accused with the girl was 
not reliable; that test identification parade was not conducted properly; that H 
215 
216 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999) SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A body recovered at the behest of respondent was capable of explanation; and 
the circumstance that semen and blood were detected on the under clothes of 
respondent was vitiated by delay in their seizure. Aggrieved by the judgment 
of High Court, State has filed the present appeals. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
B 
HELD : 1. A human mind, on hearing about any shocking incident, would 
have the tendency to recollect any previous event which could have had a 
connection with that incident. If as a matter of fact PWs-3, 8 and 14 had 
occasion to see a crying girl of that age on the very day of the gruesome episode, 
there is nothing improbable in those witnesses remembering the person who 
C was seen in the company of that girl. If they had immediately informed the 
police that they noticed a similarly aged girl crying in the company of an 
utter stranger of that locality that cannot be brushed aside as a doubtful 
conduct. [221-D-E] 
D 
2.1. Identification parades are not primarily meant for the court. They 
are meant for investigation purposes. The object of conducting test 
identification parade is two fold. First is to enable the witnesses to satisfy 
themselves that the prisoner whom they suspect is really the one who was 
seen by them in connection with the commission of the crime. Second is to 
satisfy the investigating authorities that the suspect is the real person whom 
E the witnesses had seen in connection with the said occurrence. So the officer 
conducting the test identification parade should ensure that the said object of 
the parade is achieved. [223-B-C] 
F 
Budhsen v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [1970) 2 SCC 128 and Ramanathan 
v. State o/Tami/ Nadu, [1978] 3 SCC 86, relied on. 
2.2. The minutes of the test identification parade reveal that the 
safeguards adopted by the Executive Magistrate were quite sufficient for 
ensuring that the parade was conducted in a reasonably foolproof manner as 
all precautions were taken to ensure that the witnesses could not see the 
G suspect before the parade. (223-D) 
3. If the accused declines to tell the court the source of his knowledge 
about the concealment of dead body or an incriminating material recovered at 
his instance, court can presume that it was concealed by the accused himself. 
This is because accused is the only person who can offer the explanation as 
I 
H to how else he came to

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