V. VIJAY KUMAR versus STATE OF KERALA

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 208 · Decided: 10-12-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
V. VIJA Y KUMAR 
v. 
ST A TE OF KERALA 
DECEMBER I 0, 1999 
B 
[G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] 
Criminal Trial-Circumstantial evidence-Conviction-Circumstances 
established by prosecution-Such circumstances capable of explanation and 
C not inconsistent with innocenc.e of accused persons-Held, under the facts 
and circumstances, conviction set aside-Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 
302134, 201 and 120-B. 
Prosecution alleged that deceased was watchman of a College and on 
the fateful day while closing the gate at night there was some quarrel between 
D him and accused No. I-appellant which was reported by the watchman to the 
Principal of the College. The dead body of watchman was found hanging on 
the next day. Trial Court tried and convicted the appellants-accused under 
Sections 302/34, 201 and 120-B IPC on the basis of circumstantial evidence 
since there were no eye-witnesses to the occurrence on the grounds that all 
accused persons were assigned duty at the Colleg_!; that evidence of Principal 
E of College indicated that there was quarrel between the deceased and a police 
constable; that human blood was found in the guard room; that medical evidence 
indicated that death was homicidal in nature; that fibre of lungi of accused 
No.1 was found in the hands of deceased; and that the lungi that was used as 
ligature was stained with human blood of Group 'A' which was the blood group 
F of accused No. 2. Judgment of the trial court was upheld in appeal by the 
High Court. Hence these appeals. 
The appellants contended that there was no evidence to indicate that they 
were seen inside the campus alongwith the deceased by anybody; that since 
prosecution did not establish the fact that the lungi that was used as a ligature 
G belonged to accused No.2, the presence of blood of the same group as that of 
accused No. 2 on lungi did not necessarily involve accused No. 2 with the 
crime; and that presence of fibre of lungi of accused No.I found in the hands 
of deceased could not be clinching evidence against accused No. 1 in view of 
the fact that they had quarrelled. 
H 
The respondent-State contended that the circumstances proved by the 
208 
V. VIJAYKUMARv. STATEOFKERALA 
209 
prosecution make the entire chain complete and therefore, conviction of the A 
appellants was unassailable. 
Allowing the appeals, this Court 
HELD : 1. In case of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must 
establish different circumstances beyond reasonable doubt and all those B 
circumstances taken together must lead to no other inference except that of 
the guilt of the accused. To justify an inference of guilt the circumstances 
from which such inference is sought to be drawn, must be incompatible with 
the innocence of the accused and incapable of explanation upon any other 
reasonable hypothesis than that of his guilt. [212-G] 
2. There is no witness, who has seen all the accused persons together· 
with the deceased on the fateful night in the college campus. In the absence 
of any evidence that all the accused persons were seen in the guard room last 
with the deceased, the preseQce of human blood in the guard room cannot be 
c 
a clinching circumstance to bring home the charge against the accused D 
persons. That apart, it has not been established that the said blood is of the 
same.group as that of the deceased. It cannot, therefore, be reasonable to hold 
that the deceased was assaulted in the guard room. [213-F, G, H; 214-A) 
3. The presence of group 'A' blood on the lungi that was used as ligature, 
which is also the blood group of accused No.2, could have been utilised as E 
clinching circumstance against the said accused, had it been established that 
the lungi belonged to accused No. 2. But in the absence of any evidence and 
further in the absence of any investigation as to what was the blood group of 
the deceased, the said circumstance cannot be held to be a clinching 
circumstance, so far as accused No. 2 is concerned. (214-B] 
F 
4. The only other circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is the 
presence of fibre of lungi of accused No.1 in the hands of the deceased. But 
there had been some altercation between the accused No. 1 and the deceased, 
even before the deceased went to the house of Principal, and further after he 
came back, the deceased assaulted accused No.1. In such circumstances, mere G 
presence of fibre of the lungi of accused No.1 in the hands of the deceased 
cannot be held to be a conclusi

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