Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Manoj Kumar, who was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of a 17-year-old girl. The case was based on circumstantial evidence as there was no direct eyewitness. The prosecution established that the accused, a neighbor, was present at the victim's house on the day of the incident, as testified by PW2 who saw him there. The accused failed to explain injuries on his face. The postmortem indicated that the victim was strangled and then hanged to simulate suicide. An extrajudicial confession was made by the accused before PW4. The trial court and High Court convicted the appellant, and the Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding the chain of circumstances complete and the extrajudicial confession corroborated. The court also noted that the reference regarding second FIR was unnecessary as no second FIR was registered.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on chain of circumstances including last seen, extrajudicial confession, injuries on accused, and medical evidence - Held that the chain of circumstances was complete and proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 8-11).
B) Evidence Law - Extrajudicial Confession - Corroboration - Extrajudicial confession made before PW4 was corroborated by independent circumstances such as presence of accused at scene, injuries, and postmortem report - Held that extrajudicial confession can form basis of conviction if corroborated by other evidence (Paras 10-11).
C) Criminal Procedure - Second FIR - Reference - The question of law regarding second FIR was rendered infructuous as no second FIR was registered in the case - Held that the reference was not required to be answered (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based on circumstantial evidence including extrajudicial confession, last seen, and injuries is sustainable.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- Extrajudicial confession
- Last seen evidence
- Chain of circumstances
- Section 302 IPC
Case Details
Criminal Appeal No. 2122 of 2010
N.V. Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Indira Banerjee
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought acquittal from conviction and life sentence.
Filing Reason
Appellant was convicted for murder based on circumstantial evidence and extrajudicial confession.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted appellant on 14.05.1997; High Court upheld conviction in Criminal Appeal No.1192 of 2001.
Issues
Whether the conviction based on circumstantial evidence including extrajudicial confession is sustainable.
Whether the chain of circumstances is complete to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that conviction was solely based on uncorroborated extrajudicial confession and that the case was one of suicide with false implication.
Respondent argued that prosecution proved guilt through last seen, extrajudicial confession, injuries on accused, absence of alibi, and medical evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and consistent with the guilt of the accused. Extrajudicial confession, when corroborated by independent circumstances such as last seen, injuries, and medical evidence, can form the basis of conviction.
Judgment Excerpts
the issue of second FIR does not arise in the present matter.
the accusedappellant entered the house and tried to establish forceful physical relations with the deceased and the same was strongly resisted by her.
the extrajudicial confession of the accused, therefore, finds independent reliable corroboration from the aforesaid circumstances.
considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, we conclude that the chain of events has been rightly analysed by both the courts below and the same leads towards proving the culpability of the accused.
Procedural History
Trial court convicted appellant on 14.05.1997. High Court upheld conviction in Criminal Appeal No.1192 of 2001. Appellant appealed to Supreme Court. Reference was made on 22.05.2014 regarding second FIR, but found infructuous. Supreme Court dismissed appeal on 05.04.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302
