JAMNADAS Vs STATE OF M.P
Bench: PRAFULLA C. PANT,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
Case number: Crl.A. No.-000156-000156 / 2015
Diary number: 38906 / 2012
Advocates: PRATIBHA JAIN Vs
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 1
Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 156 OF 2015
Jamnadas … Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. …Respondent
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 155 OF 2015
Manoj … Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. …Respondent
J U D G M E N T
Prafulla C. Pant, J.
These appeals are directed against judgment and order
dated 23.8.2012 passed by High Court of Madhya Pradesh,
Bench Indore, whereby criminal appeal no. 977 of 2007 (filed
Page 2
Page 2 of 37
by father-in-law of deceased), criminal appeal no. 993 of 2007
(filed by husband of deceased), and criminal appeal no. 1000
of 2007 (filed by mother-in-law of deceased) were dismissed.
At the outset, it is relevant to mention that Special Leave
Petition (Crl.) No. 9812 of 2013 filed by Dhanwantari
(mother-in-law of deceased) was dismissed by this Court as
withdrawn on 16.9.2014. The present criminal appeal nos.
156 of 2015 and 155 of 2015 have arisen out of Special Leave
Petition(s) filed by father-in-law and husband of deceased,
respectively.
2. It is a case where a young bride was brutally murdered
within six months of her marriage, her body chopped off in two
pieces and thrown in a park.
3. Prosecution story in brief is that on 16.9.2006 at about
19.50 hours (7.50 p.m.) PW 19 Constable Nirmal Kumar Patil
received telephonic information at Police Control Room that a
middle aged woman came on a scooty, and threw two bundles
wrapped in bed sheets in Sewa Ram Zilani Garden, Patel
Nagar, Indore, and that some blood stains were visible from
Page 3
Page 3 of 37
the packets. On the basis of the telephonic information,
Ext.P.33 was recorded at the Control Room. Within five
minutes at about 19.55 hours (7.55 p.m.) the information was
transmitted to the concerned police station Juni and
information Ext. P.34 was recorded. After Dehati Murg
intimation Ext.P.1 entered, PW 17 Head Constable Ashraf Ali
left the Police Station Juni along with PW 12 Constable Mohd.
M. Ahmad towards the spot. Enquiries were made in the same
evening on which PW 1 Mukesh Jaiswal told that as usual on
that day (16.09.2006) at about 5.30 p.m., he had gone to
temple and was sitting with PW 5 Manohar @ Mannu, PW 4
Udhav Dass and PW 3 Narayana. They sent PW 2 Phugga @
Kamal to bring milk, and after sometime PW 2 Phugga @
Kamal came back and told them that one packet wrapped in
colored bed sheet was lying in the park near walking track, in
which blood spots were visible. The above named four persons
with Phugga went towards the place, and saw the bundle with
blood stains. Soon thereafter they saw a woman coming on an
Activa who threw another packet, and went away. On this the
telephonic information was given to the Control Room.
Page 4
Page 4 of 37
Thereafter Murg inquiry was made by PW-35 SI Mohan Lal
Purohit, who registered crime no. 431 of 2006 on the next day
17.9.2006 against unknown persons. Inquest report Ext.P-6
was prepared by the police on 17.9.2006 at about noon after
dead body was identified as the one that of Bhoomi @ Richa by
PW 6 Sanjay Chhabra, cousin of the deceased. The dead body
was sent in a sealed condition for autopsy.
4. Thereafter, house of the appellants i.e. 40, Sarvodaya
Nagar (Indore) was searched. During investigation blood stains
were found in the house of the appellants. Samples of blood
stains were taken and, search memo Ext.P-54, P-56 and P-57
prepared in the presence of PW 30 Suresh Neema and one
Ramesh. Silver colour Activa bearing registration No. MP
09/JX-7556 was also seized.
5. The investigation revealed that marriage of Bhoomi @
Richa (deceased), daughter of PW-22 Rajesh Kumar Nachani,
was solemnized with appellant Manoj on 22.4.2006 at Indore,
whereafter she started residing in 40, Sarvodaya Nagar with
her husband (Manoj), father-in-law (Jamnadas), Mother-in-law
Page 5
Page 5 of 37
(Dhanwantari), brother-in-law (Vishal) and minor sister-in-law
(Heena @ Madhuri).
6. On 19.9.2006, appellants Manoj and Jamnadas along
with Dhanwantari (mother-in-law) were arrested. After their
arrest, accused were medically examined by PW 27 Dr. G.L.
Sodhi, who found marks of simple injuries on the person of
Dhanwantari, and medical report Ext.P-50 was prepared. On
23.9.2016, Vishal (brother-in-law of deceased) was also
arrested.
7. After investigation, a charge sheet was filed against four
accused namely – Manoj (husband), Jamnadas (father-in-law),
Dhanwantari (mother-in-law) and Vishal (brother-in-law) for
their trial in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302
(read with Section 34) 201, 304-B and 498-A IPC. The case
appears to have been committed by the Magistrate to the
Court of Sessions where the trial court framed charge in
respect of all the above offences against the first three
accused. As against accused Vishal, charge only relating to
Page 6
Page 6 of 37
offence punishable under Section 201 IPC was framed. All the
accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
8. Prosecution got examined PW 1 Mukesh Jaiswal (who
saw Dhanwantari disposing of body of the deceased), PW 2
Phugga @ Kamal (who first noticed the thrown 1st packet), PW
3 Narayana (who was with PW 1), PW 4 Udhav Dass (who was
also with PW1), PW 5 Manohar @ Mannu (who was also with
above four, and informed the Police Control Room), PW 6
Sanjay Chhabra (cousin of the deceased, who identified the
dead body), PW 7 Dinesh (Parking Stand wallah), PW 8
Yogendra (Hostile witness), PW 9 Rajesh Agrawal (Contractor
of boundary wall of the park), PW 10 Constable Ram Babu
Sharma (who received ten sealed packets from M.Y.Hospital
for being sent to F.S.L.), PW 11 Head Constable Radhey
Shyam Sharma (who prepared Ext.P-25 Murg/ intimation), PW
12 Constable Mohd. M. Ahmad, PW 13 Constable Smt. Savitri,
PW 14 Constable Mahabal Singh Chauhan, PW 15 Dr. N.M.
Unda (who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the
deceased), PW 16 Dr. Anil Kapoor, PW 17 Head Constable
Page 7
Page 7 of 37
Ashraf Ali, PW 18 Dr. Bharti Dwivedi, PW 19 Constable
Nirmal Kumar Patil (posted in PCR, Indore who informed the
Duty officer), PW 20 Manoj Chauhan (Wireless Operator who
received message from PW 19), PW 21 Pankaj Nagpal, PW 22
Rajesh Kumar Nachani (father of the deceased), PW 23
Rajendra Kumar, PW 24 Keshav Kumar, PW 25 Sonam, PW
26 Umesh Nara (uncle of deceased), PW 27 Dr. G.L.Sodhi (who
examined injuries on person of Dhanwantari), PW 28 Jeevan
Lotani, PW 29 Harish, PW 30 Suresh Neema, PW 31 Yogesh
Gupta, PW 32 Madhuri (minor sister-in-law of deceased), PW
33 Padvilochan Shukla (Investigating Officer), PW 34 Raksh
Pal Singh (Incharge P.S. Juni), PW 35 Mohan Lal Purohit and
PW 36 Sub Inspector K. L. Pandey.
9. The prosecution evidence was put to each one of the
accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C to which they replied that
the same is false. It is pleaded by the accused that Bhoomi @
Richa was missing after she went to her relative’s place. It is
further pleaded by the appellants that they were in the shop
during the day time when Bhoomi @ Richa went missing. In
Page 8
Page 8 of 37
defence, DW 1 Parmanand Sharma, (servant in the shop) was
got examined in support of plea of alibi of the appellants.
10. The trial court after hearing the parties found that charge
framed against accused Vishal (brother-in-law of the deceased)
regarding his involvement in the crime, was not proved beyond
reasonable doubt as such he was acquitted. The trial court
found rest of the three accused, namely, Dhanwantari, Jamna
das and Manoj guilty of offence of murder with common
intention punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34
IPC, and convicted them accordingly. Accused Dhanwantari
was further convicted under Section 201 IPC for causing
disappearance of evidence of murder. After hearing on
sentence, 6th Additional Sessions Judge, (Indore), vide his
order dated 24.8.2009, sentenced each of the convicts under
Section 302/34 IPC imprisonment for life and directed to pay
fine of Rs.5000/-. It was further directed that in default of
payment of fine, the defaulter shall undergo further rigorous
imprisonment for a period of one year. Convict Dhanvantari
was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
Page 9
Page 9 of 37
period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in respect
of offence punishable under Section 201 IPC and in default of
payment of fine she was directed to undergo three months
rigorous imprisonment. On other heads, the accused stood
acquitted from the charge.
11. The three convicts filed separate appeals before the High
Court and the same were heard together and disposed of by
the common judgment and order dated 23.8.2012, impugned
in these appeals.
12. Before further discussion, we think it just and proper to
mention the ante mortem injuries and post mortem injuries
found on the body of the deceased (Bhoomi @ Richa), recorded
by PW-15 Dr. N.M. Unda, Demonstrator, Forensic Medicine
and Toxicology Department, M. G. M. Medical College & M. Y.
Hospital, Indore on 17.09.2006 at 2:00 p.m. recorded in
Exhibit P-27. The observations in the autopsy report are
reproduced below:-
Page 10
Page 10 of 37
“Dead body received in sealed condition, in two
separated pieces in the two bed sheets stained with
blood. Body appears cleaned and washed. Faint
blood stained marks on the body, no clotting present.
Dorsal part and the skin of the hands and fingers
showing very slight shrinking effect and all the
wound part small sizes show very scanty amount of
blood at deeper level while upper part shows clean.
Body separated with hard and sharp object at just
above the umbilicus shows multiple inflictions by
moving body all around and vertebral column cut at
inter vertebral disc with multiple inflictions over the
cartilogenous part and on vertebrae. Some part of the
intestinal loops small and large missing, and faecal
soiling present and lower part of abdomen where
vertical present right to umbilicus to pubic symphysis
indicating cut mark on the bony and soft tissue part.
Body separation exposing abdominal and Pelvic
cavity part are post-mortem in nature with separated
intestinal opening (available). Some part of the
kidney blood vessel and soft tissue missing.
Multiple post mortem wounds present on the different
parts of the body over the foot, leg and wrist shows
the intention with post mortem nature to convert
body in small pieces for disposal.
Page 11
Page 11 of 37
Multiple defence wound present in the both hands
and palmer side over the metacarpo phalangeal joint and proximal phalaxin part in a plane with fist
closed. Cut mark manner (pattern) shows an object moved within closed fist. Other three deep cut marks
present in the palm of left hand also present. Total number given on other page with other small wounds
present on both hands.
Lower half part 96 cm and upper part 63 cm.
adjusted length.
Body average built, eyes closed. Partly, mouth closed
and lip approximated. Rigor Mortis present all over
body stiffness present. Hypostasis present on the
back side of the body and fixed and faint. Cut part
circumference 73 cm and 23 cm at chest upper part.
Lower part circumference and diameter 27 cm into
20 cm both part matching each other shows the
multiple cut marks. Scalp hairs present at places
over the body. Other hairs also present.
Stomach some watery fluid light brown in colour
about 190 ml with slight altered smell and mucosa
Page 12
Page 12 of 37
healthy. Small intestine - contains little slight
digested food. Large intestine - contains little faecal
in the lower available part. Liver and Spleen pale
and healthy. Kidney - dorceline lower part missing.
Genitals - available but shows stabwound in the
lower part laterally in the broad ligature. Uterus
small size. Slide from cervice opening and uterine
cavity made along with vaginal smear slide and
swab – pubic hair shaved and preserved for any
foreign hair and other evidences. Uterus measured
in formation for histopathological examination.
Anal opening dilated and shows an funnel pattern
with multiple superficial indepth heal scar marks …
with mostly healed too.
Both lungs pale and healthy
Trachea pale and healthy injury present described in
injury at serial 3.
Heart practically completely empty.
External injury on scalp described on Injury section.
Superficial cut marks present on the skull, Rest
healthy
Brain extremely congested and non specific smell
present. Preserved for chemical analysis and sent to
Page 13
Page 13 of 37
pathological examination no subdual or extradual
collection found.
Death was due to shock and hemorrhage as result of
(ante mortem) multiple injuries to the body.
Death homicidal in nature.
Along with ante mortem injuries, post mortem
injuries present i.e. post mortem separation of body
into two halves and trying (effect of cutting) to into
multiple pieces with missing of intestinal parts (loops)
and kidney lower part, mesentery and blood vessels.
Evidence of defence wounds present and effect of
leaning i.e. removing stains present.
Preservation
1. Viscera preserved for chemical analysis.
2. Vaginal smear slides swab preserved along
with cervical smear, uterine cavity fluid slide
preserved.
3. Anal swab slide preserved
4. Brain material preserved separately for
chemical analysis.
Page 14
Page 14 of 37
5. Pubic hair preserved with other material after
shaving.
6. Trimming of nails all fingers with its content
7. Scalp hair with skin pieces.
8. Other hair present
9. Both bed sheets
Brain and uterus preserved for histopathology
examination in formation.
All articles sealed and handed over to P.S.
Duration of death within 12 to 36 hours since post
mortem examination.”
(Emphasis supplied)
Wound marks as recorded in separate sheet annexed
with autopsy report are reproduced below:-
I. Four incised wounds present on the left side
face including lateral part eye lid to the ear
sizes (1) 11 x 1 ½ (2) 10 x ½ (3) 9 x 0.75 (4) (7 x
2) cm all are vertically placed extending up to
forehead left side. II. Multiple incised wound present on the right face
11 in (Eleven) number with muscle deep size
Page 15
Page 15 of 37
1.5cm x 1.0cm to 1x1 cm size on upper lip. Rest
on cheek and zygomatic area.
III. Contusion present on the right zygomatic part
between 2 incised wound 3.5 x 1.3 cm size
transversely placed.
IV. Stab wound present on the right side cheek just
lateral to angle of mouth 3x1.5cm into deep
tongue skin deep 3.2 cm other smaller incised
on its medical and size 2 x 1cm size this also
deep skin.
V. Injuries as on the neck. Anterioly 3 x 1.0 cm
sizes 2 wounds present just lateral to med in a
right side and 2 wounds later mid line on left
side. Wound deep to neck tissue structure but
anteriorly no large vessel cut of wound deep to
the sub cut to neck tissue all the soft tissue
structure attached to the trachea on right side
shows cut marks. Back of the neck. Chop
wound present on the back mid line part size
6.9cm x 2.5cm x deep to the vertebral column
transversely placed with 2 infliction overlapping
each other mid line size measured 4.5 cm
wound all the muscles and deep structure
injury show cut marks.
Page 16
Page 16 of 37
VI. 2 incised wounds present on the chest 4.0cm
medical to the left nipple size 3.0 x 1.2cm at 6th
rib other on right side 3.0cm lateral to mid line
at 7th rib size 2.8 x 1.0cm depth to the bone.
Multiple very small and fine linear large
marking wound present on the chest 0.1cm
deep present with varying length.
VII. Wound on right side upper limb (on the arm)
measuring deep wound 15 x 6 cm size deep to
muscle up to bone but no cut mark (on the bone)
seen. Muscles deep with two other injuries 5 x
2 cm and measuring with 3 superficial injury
mark.
VIII. Forearm multiple superficial injury longer size
obliquely placed and fine linear type. (Size not
mentioned). At right wrist obliquely placed 2
injury 6 x 2 cm deep to bone on dorsal part 6 x
0.3 cm this also present… medial to it. Defence
type wound. 3 incised wound present on right
forearm posterior medial border measuring
1x04cm at upper 1/3rd part second at lower
1/3rd part 3.0 x 1.0cm and 2.7 x 1.3 cm with
oblique slashing effect. One wound on the
dorsal of the thumb right side 1.2 cm x 0.2 cm
Page 17
Page 17 of 37
skin deep. 5 wounds present on the right four
finger 10cm to 1.4cm and size width 0.2 to 0.3
cm deep to bone and to knuckle contusion also
present.
IX. Injury on left upper limb 4 incised wounds
present on the left upper limb (1) 4x2cm (2) 3.5
x 2.0cm (3)1.5 x 1.0cm and (4) 1 x 1cm size. All
are muscle deep. 3 injury present on the back
of the arm (1) 6 x 3cm (2) 3 x 1cm (3) 2.5 x
1.0cm all deep to muscle. Left forearm anterior
middle part 4 x 2cm size deep to muscle. Practically 3.4 amputated part size of the
wound 6 x 4.0 cm. Post mortem (in nature)……..
(illegible)
X. One stab wound present on the abdomen deep
to cavity 3.9cm x 2.0cm and other 6 incised
wounds present on the abdomen varying size
small deep to subcutaneous tissue.
XI. Four incised wounds present on the buttock (1)
2 x 1 (2) 3 x 1 ½ (3) 2 x 1 ½ (4) 3 x 1 ½ cm on
right side buttock and below buttock all deep to
muscle.
XII. Two stab wounds present on the thigh femoral
triangle L/3 part size of the wound 9.2 x 3.5 cm
Page 18
Page 18 of 37
deep to the bone part with slight extension
effect total depth of the wound 8.5 cm all the
tissues and vertical part structure cut wound
….. in nature object is very sharp. There is very
less and very slight contusion. Direction of
wound is anterior posterior. 2 wounds incised
measuring 5.2cm meet each other with
overlapping.
XIII. Anteriorly Right thigh post mortem nature
wound 5 x 1 cm deep muscle. An injury of 9.2
cm on right leg at L/3 and middle 1/3 part of
leg. Cutting of both feet with ……… marks of injury
present at foot lower and medial part and left
foot lateral part. Right foot 6 wounds of 11.00 x
0.5 cm to 1.2 cm size depending upon the depth
maximum upto 2 cms with cutting of bones. (Emphasis supplied)
13. PW-15 Dr. N.M. Unda has stated that injury No. IX (in
para) and injury No. XIII were post mortem in nature. He
further opined that except contusion marks ante mortem and
post mortem injuries were caused by hard and sharp object.
From the autopsy report, quoted above, read with statement of
PW-15 Dr. N.M. Unda, it is clear that the deceased died due to
Page 19
Page 19 of 37
shock and haemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries to the
body. Death of Bhoomi @ Richa was homicidal in nature with
twelve ante mortem injuries mentioned above. PW 15 Dr.
Unda has further proved reports (Exhibit P-30, P-30A, P-30B,
P-30B, P-30C, P-30D and P-30E) regarding examination made
on 25-09-2006 of weapons (knives and scissors) sent to the M.
G. M. Medical College and M. Y. Hospital, Indore.
14. Antemortem injuries narrated by PW-15 Dr. N.M. Unda
clearly suggest that the deceased attempted to save herself
and resisted the assault with all her might before her death,
and she appears to have been overpowered by the assailants,
and killed brutally.
15. Now we would like to examine the injuries stated to have
been suffered in the incident by co-accused Dhanwantari.
PW-27 Dr. G. L. Sodhi, CMO, M. Y. Hospital, Indore, has
examined the injuries found on the person of Dhanwantari
(co-accused, mother-in-law of the deceased) on 20.9.2006 and
the same are quoted below from Exhibit P-50:-
Page 20
Page 20 of 37
“(i) Healing wound of right thumb pretends of size
1.5 x 0.2 cm x brownish scab. Transversally
placed.
(ii) healing wound over right index finger over
middle 3rd posterior aspect transversally placed
of size 1 x 0.5 cm with brownish scab and
palmer aspect transversally oblique of size .75
x .5 cm x healing scab.
(iii) Linear healing wound over right ring finger
dorsum aspect middle 3rd of size .75 x 0.2 cm x
brownish scab.
(iv) Linear healing wound 2 in number parallel
obliquely placed of size viz 2 x 0.2 cm and 1.75
x 0.2 cm over right cubital region with brownish
scab.
(v) Linear healing wound right cubital region 1.5
cm lateral to injury No. (iv) of size 1 x 0.2 cm
with brownish scab
(vi) Abrasion over back of right shoulder of size 0.5 x
0.2 cm with brownish scab.
Cause of the injuries could not be opined due to
healing and brownish scab found. Injuries may be
caused within 3 to 6 days since examination and
injuries are simple in nature.”
Page 21
Page 21 of 37
16. There is also report of Regional Forensic Science
Laboratory, Rau (Indore) on record. The relevant extract from
the report dated 31-10-2006 (Exhibit P-73) regarding presence
of blood on the nails of the three accused is reproduced
below:-
No.1 Packet Mark
Found inside here Exhibit/detail Mark
From whom/whose seizure dated
Details of tins No., size, colour, distri-bu tion
35. V HB) Nails (04 Nos.)
Swab
Nails (08 Nos.)
Swab
V1
V2
V3
V4
Memo of accused Accused Dhanwanti from MGM, Indore 20.09.2016
-do-
-do-
-do-
---------
---------
--------- 36. W Nails (08 Nos.) W Accused Manoj.
20.09.2016 --------- 37. W1 Nails (08 Nos.) W1 -do-
--------- 38. X Nails (08 Nos.) X Accused
Jamnadas 20.09.2016
---------
39. X1 Nails (08 Nos.) X1 -do- ---------
Page 22
Page 22 of 37
It is reported on Ex. P-73 that after
Benzedrine/Phenaphthelene and crystal test on exhibits were
done, it was found that on Exhibits V1, V2, V3 and V4 (i.e. on
nails of co-accused Dhanwantari, mother-in-law of the
deceased) blood was found and examination of category and
group of the blood found on these exhibits was done; and on
Exhibits W, W1, X, and X1 (i.e. on nails of the appellants)
blood was not found.
17. On the basis of above finding, learned counsel for the
appellants argued that unlike the finding against Dhanwantari
(mother-in-law of the deceased), it is clear that there is no
adverse finding as against the present appellants. It is also
pointed out that from the post mortem report Ex. P-27, the
incident appears to have taken place sometime during the day,
and natural presence of the appellants at that point of time
was at the place of their work, which also reflects from the
statement of DW-1 Parmanand Sharma, who told that the
appellants were in the shop on 16-09-2006 from 9:30 a.m. till
7:30 p.m. It is further submitted that witnesses PW-1 Mukesh
Page 23
Page 23 of 37
Jayswal, PW-3 Narayana, PW-4 Udhvdass and PW-5 Manohar
alias Mannu have stated that it was a woman who was seen
taking a bundle and threw the same near Sevaram Gilani
Garden, situated near Patel nagar, Indore, but there is nothing
in their evidence as against the present appellants.
18. We have considered the above submissions in the light of
evidence on the record, and the law laid down by this Court
applicable to such cases. Undoubtedly, it is a case of
circumstantial evidence. In Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v.
State of Maharashtra1, a three-Judge Bench of this Court
has laid down the law as to when in a case of circumstantial
evidence charge can be said to have been established. Five
points enumerated in said case are summarized as under: -
(i) The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is
drawn should be fully established. The accused must be,
and not merely may be guilty, before a court can convict
and the mental distance between “may be” and “must be”
1 (1984) 4 SCC 116
Page 24
Page 24 of 37
is long and divides vague conjectures from sure
conclusions;
(ii) The facts so established should be consistent only with
the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say,
they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis
except that the accused is guilty;
(iii) The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and
tendency;
(iv) They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the
one to be proved; and
(v) There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to
leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion
consistent with the innocence of the accused and must
show that in all human probability the act must have
been done by the accused.
19. On behalf of the appellants, it is submitted that the
accused has a right to silence and no adverse inference can be
drawn from his silence as to the cause of death of the
deceased. In this connection, reliance is placed on paragraph
Page 25
Page 25 of 37
141 of Selvi and others v. State of Karnataka2, which
reads as under: -
“141. At this juncture, it must be reiterated that Indian law incorporates the “rule against adverse
inferences from silence” which is operative at the
trial stage. As mentioned earlier, this position is
embodied in a conjunctive reading of Article 20(3) of
the Constitution and Sections 161(2), 313(3) and
proviso (b) of Section 315(1) CrPC. The gist of this
position is that even though an accused is a
competent witness in his/her own trial, he/she
cannot be compelled to answer questions that could
expose him/her to incrimination and the trial Judge
cannot draw adverse inferences from the refusal to
do so. This position is cemented by prohibiting any
of the parties from commenting on the failure of the
accused to give evidence. This rule was lucidly
explained in the English case of Woolmington v.
Director of Public Prosecutions (1935 AC 462 : 1935
All ER Rep 1 (HL)), AC at p. 481:
“The ‘right to silence’ is a principle of common
law and it means that normally courts or
tribunals of fact should not be invited or
encouraged to conclude, by parties or 2 (2010) 7 SCC 263
Page 26
Page 26 of 37
prosecutors, that a suspect or an accused is
guilty merely because he has refused to
respond to questions put to him by the police
or by the Court.”
Above observations are made by this Court in an answer
to the legal question raised in the batch of criminal appeals
relating to the involuntary administration of certain scientific
techniques, namely, narcoanalysis, polygraph examination
and the Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) test for the
purpose of improving investigation efforts in criminal cases.
In the present case facts and circumstances are different. The
above referred case, in our opinion, is of little help to the
appellants in the present case.
20. In State of W.B. v. Mir Mohammad Omar and others3,
this Court, while interpreting the burden of extent of proof on
prosecution, observed as under: -
“31. The pristine rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused
should not be taken as a fossilised doctrine as
3 (2000) 8 SCC 382
Page 27
Page 27 of 37
though it admits no process of intelligent reasoning.
The doctrine of presumption is not alien to the
above rule, nor would it impair the temper of the
rule. On the other hand, if the traditional rule
relating to burden of proof of the prosecution is
allowed to be wrapped in pedantic coverage, the
offenders in serious offences would be the major
beneficiaries and the society would be the casualty.
xxx xxx xxx
36. In this context we may profitably utilise the legal principle embodied in Section 106 of the
Evidence Act which reads as follows: “When any fact
is especially within the knowledge of any person,
the burden of proving that fact is upon him.”
37. The section is not intended to relieve the prosecution of its burden to prove the guilt of the
accused beyond reasonable doubt. But the section
would apply to cases where the prosecution has
succeeded in proving facts from which a reasonable
inference can be drawn regarding the existence of
certain other facts, unless the accused by virtue of
his special knowledge regarding such facts, failed to
offer any explanation which might drive the court to
draw a different inference.”
Page 28
Page 28 of 37
21. Shri S.K. Jain, learned senior counsel, on behalf of the
appellants drew our attention to the case of Tomaso Bruno
and another v. State of Uttar Pradesh4, and argued that to
invoke Section 106 of the Evidence Act the prosecution must
have proved presence of the appellants in their house at the
time of the incident. We have carefully gone through the case
cited before us. It was a case where CCTV footage of the hotel
was available but not produced to show the presence of the
accused in the hotel and, as such, the plea of alibi that the
accused had gone to witness “Subah-e-Bararas” from the hotel
was accepted. The present case relates to a different kind of
incident where a bride has been brutally murdered inside the
house and her body, after cutting into pieces, was thrown in
the park.
22. In Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra5,
which is a case similar in nature to the present one, this Court
has held as under: -
4 (2015) 7 SCC 178 5 (2006) 10 SCC 681
Page 29
Page 29 of 37
“15. Where an offence like murder is committed in secrecy inside a house, the initial burden to
establish the case would undoubtedly be upon the
prosecution, but the nature and amount of evidence
to be led by it to establish the charge cannot be of
the same degree as is required in other cases of
circumstantial evidence. The burden would be of a
comparatively lighter character. In view of Section
106 of the Evidence Act there will be a
corresponding burden on the inmates of the house
to give a cogent explanation as to how the crime was
committed. The inmates of the house cannot get
away by simply keeping quiet and offering no
explanation on the supposed premise that the
burden to establish its case lies entirely upon the
prosecution and there is no duty at all on an
accused to offer any explanation.”
23. Now we come to the plea of alibi taken by the appellants
that they were in the shop at the time of the incident. On
behalf of the appellants reliance has been placed on the case
of Narendra Singh and another v. State of M.P.6, in which
it has been held that even in a case where a plea of alibi is
raised, the burden of proof remains on the prosecution, and it
6 (2004) 10 SCC 699
Page 30
Page 30 of 37
has been further observed that presumption of innocence is a
human right.
24. In response to above Shri C.D. Singh, learned counsel for
the State of Madhya Pradesh has referred to the case of
Suresh and another v. State of Haryana7, wherein,
discussing the issue in paragraph 19, this Court observed: -
“9. ………..No doubt, the burden of proof is on the prosecution and Section 106 is not meant to relieve
it of that duty but the said provision is attracted
when it is impossible or it is proportionately difficult
for the prosecution to establish facts which are
strictly within the knowledge of the accused……”
25. Undoubtedly, as proved on the record in the present case
the deceased was murdered inside the house and her body
was thrown in the park, and was not missing from the house
after going to her relative’s place, as pleaded by the appellants
in their statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. They have taken a blatant false plea.
7 (2015) 2 SCC 227
Page 31
Page 31 of 37
26. In Kuldeep Singh and others v. State of Rajasthan8,
in paragraph 18 a three-Judge Bench of this Court has held
that in a case of circumstantial evidence when the accused
offers an explanation and that explanation is found to be
untrue, then the same offers an additional link in the chain of
circumstances, to complete the chain.
27. Similar view has been taken by this Court in Rumi Bora
Dutta v. State of Assam9, wherein it has been accepted that
a false answer offered by the accused when his attention is
drawn to the circumstances, it renders a circumstance to be of
inculpating nature, i.e. in such a situation a false answer can
also be counted as providing a missing link for completing the
chain.
28. In an answer to above, the appellants have placed
reliance on Rajkumar v. State of M.P.10, wherein it has been
held that mere false plea does not absolve the prosecution of
burden to connect the accused with the crime. On careful
reading of the case referred to above, we find that it was a case 8 (2000) 5 SCC 7 9 (2013) 7 SCC 417 10 (2004) 12 SCC 77
Page 32
Page 32 of 37
where two views were possible, and the trial court took the
view that charge cannot be said to have been proved, but the
High Court reversed it. In the case at hand there is consistent
view taken by both the courts below that the appellants had
acted in common intention with co-accused Dhanwantari in
commission of murder of the deceased.
29. Defence version of the appellants in the present case is
that appellant Jamnadas is a businessman having his shop at
5/2, Murai Mohalla, Sanyogitaganj, Indore. His working
hours at the shop were from 9 a.m. till 8-9 p.m. It is
contended that it is the usual practice for the shopkeepers in
parts of Northern India to have lunch at their shops and that
the appellants did not come to their residence for lunch. It is
further pleaded that on the date of incident, i.e. 16.9.2006, at
about 7.30 p.m. appellant Jamnadas was in his shop along
with appellant Manoj and younger son Vishal when he got a
telephone call from his wife (Dhanwantari) who was at home
and got information that Richa @ Bhoomi (deceased) had gone
to her relative’s place and did not return home. On hearing
Page 33
Page 33 of 37
this, Jamnadas with both his sons came home and launched a
search for his daughter-in-law. It is further pleaded that on
16.9.2006 till 9 p.m., when Richa @ Bhoomi did not return
home, Jamnadas along with his two sons went to the police
station for lodging missing report. At about 10 p.m.
Jamnadas’s wife Dhanwantari and their minor daughter
Heena @ Madhuri also came to the police station and that
thereafter, the police illegally detained them for 3 days without
formally arresting them. But this defence story get completely
belied as prosecution has proved to the hilt that Bhoomi @
Richa was murdered inside the appellants’ house, and there
was no question of her going to her relative’s place or missing.
30. The chain of circumstances proved on the record against
the appellants is as under: -
(i) It is established that Bhoomi @ Richa (deceased) was
living in the house of the appellants, after her marriage
on 16.04.2006 with appellant Manoj.
Page 34
Page 34 of 37
(ii) It is also established beyond reasonable doubt that death
of the deceased was homicidal in nature which occurred
on 16.09.2006.
(iii) It is also established that the deceased was murdered in
the house of the appellants where blood stains were
found.
(iv) It is also conclusively established that after commission
of murder, the body of the deceased was cut into two
pieces.
(v) It is further proved that the dead body was thrown in the
park by Dhanwantari (mother-in-law of deceased) who
was seen doing so by PW 1 to PW 5.
(vi) Perusal of the number of anti mortem and post mortem
injuries mentioned in autopsy report read with statement
of PW 15 Dr. N.M. Unda establish beyond reasonable
doubt that the crime could not have been committed by
one person alone.
(vii) There were in all five members in the family excluding the
deceased – three male members (Jamnadas father-in-law,
Manoj – Husband and Vishal brother-in-law of the
Page 35
Page 35 of 37
deceased) and two female members (Dhanwantari
mother-in-law and Heena @ Madhuri minor
sister-in-law).
(viii) PW 32 Heena @ Madhuri (minor daughter of appellant
no.1) was too young. She was a student of class VIII
when her statement was recorded during trial and she
has stated that she had gone to school on the day of
incident and after her return she slept. (This witness
was declared hostile as she did not fully support the
prosecution case). It is nobody’s case that she had any
role in commission of the crime. This leaves four accused
named in the chargesheet, out of whom Vishal,
brother-in-law, was acquitted by the trial court (Rather
discharged in respect of offence of murder). His acquittal
is upheld by the High Court, and nobody has challenged
the same. The remaining three in the field are
Dhanwantari (mother-in-law) and the appellants.
(ix) The appellants have failed to disclose as to how deceased
has died which was especially within their knowledge.
(x) It is nobody’s case that any outsider came in the house.
Page 36
Page 36 of 37
(xi) There is no report lodged to police by the appellants
regarding homicidal death of the deceased who was wife
of appellant Manoj and daughter-in-law of appellant
Jamnadas as discussed above.
(xii) False explanation has been given by the appellants in
their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that the
deceased had gone to her relative’s place and that she
was missing which is an additional link on the record
against them, in the chain of circumstances.
31. The above chain of circumstances against the appellants
is complete, and the defence theory that they were in the shop
cannot be accepted. Therefore, having re-appreciated the
entire evidence on record, we concur with the courts below
that appellants Jamnadas and Manoj had common intention
with Dhanwantari in commission of brutal murder of Bhoomi
@ Richa. It is not a fit case where impugned order requires any
interference.
Page 37
Page 37 of 37
32. For the reasons, as discussed above, these appeals are
liable to be dismissed, and the same are accordingly
dismissed.
……………….....…………J. [Prafulla C. Pant]
.……………….……………J. [D.Y. Chandrachud]
New Delhi; June 29, 2016.