Page 1

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL  APPEAL  NO. 164  OF 2008

Sooguru Subrahmanyam ... Appellant

Versus

State of A.P.               ..Respondent

J U D G M E N T

Dipak Misra, J.

The accused-appellant had entered into wedlock with  

Nagamani, the deceased, on 30.4.1998 and for some time,  

they lived in marital bliss at Hindupur.  After four months,  

the  needs  of  life  compelled  the  couple  to  shift  to  

Srikalahasti  where  the  father  of  the  deceased  was  

working.   The  experience  of  life  not  being  satisfactory  

hardly after eight months, at the insistence of the wife,  

they shifted back to Hindupur.  The shifting to Hindupur  

did  not  bring  satisfaction  as  expected  and  hence,  

eventually,  they shifted to Madanapalle town where the  

accused  was  working  prior  to  the  marriage.   As  the

Page 2

prosecution  story  further  unfurls,  at  the  time  of  

occurrence, i.e., on 17.10.2000, the accused was staying  

in  the  rented  portion  of  the  house  belonging  to  

Dhanalakshmi, PW-1.  The other portion was occupied by  

one Imamvalli, father of S. Syed Basha, PW-5.  Imamvalli  

was staying with his children and his wife was away at  

Quwait  and  the  proximity  of  stay,  as  alleged  by  the  

prosecution,  gradually  developed  to  an  illicit  intimacy  

between him and the deceased.  Twelve days prior to the  

incident,  the  deceased  was  found  in  the  company  of  

Imamvalli  in  an  auto-rickshaw  by  the  accused,  who  

dragged  him out  from the  auto-rickshaw and  assaulted  

him.  The accused took the deceased to the house and  

warned her.  The differences between the couple grew to  

bitterness which resulted in severe quarrels during nights.  

On  16.10.2000,  there  was  a  quarrel  and,  as  the  

prosecution version proceeds, the accused had expressed  

his agony and anger before Pavankumar, PW-7, that if the  

deceased  did  not  discontinue  her  illicit  relationship,  he  

might be compelled to send her back to her matrimonial  

home or get rid of her.   

2

Page 3

2. As the version of the prosecution has been further  

depicted,  on  17.10.2000,  about  6.30  a.m.,  the  

deceased was found dead in the house and the doors  

were  locked  from  outside.   PW-1,  the  landlady,  

lodged an FIR and a crime was registered.  During  

the course of investigation, the lock of the room was  

opened by  PW-13,  the  Investigating  Officer,  in  the  

presence  of  one  Babu  Naidu,  PW-12,  and  another.  

The  further  investigation  led  to  seizure  of  

incriminating material from the scene of the offence.  

Thereafter, inquest was held over the dead body of  

the deceased and it was sent for post mortem.  The  

investigating agency examined number of witnesses  

and  after  completing  the  investigation,  placed  the  

charge-sheet for an offence punishable under Section  

302 of  the Indian Penal  Code (for  short  “the IPC”)  

against the accused-husband before the competent  

court which, in turn, committed the matter for trial to  

the Court of Session.

3. The  accused  abjured  his  guilt  and  pleaded  false  

implication and claimed to be tried.   

3

Page 4

4. The prosecution, in order to substantiate the offence  

as alleged against the accused, examined as many  

as 15 witnesses, got 29 documents exhibited and 15  

material objects marked.  PWs-1 to 5 and 7 turned  

hostile  and  they  were  cross-examined  by  the  

prosecution.  PW-1 was the landlady who had lodged  

the  FIR,  Ext.-1,  and  PWs-2  to  5  and  7  were  the  

neighbours and all of them resiled from their original  

version.  The learned trial Judge took note of the fact  

that  there  was  no  direct  evidence  to  prove  the  

involvement of the accused in the crime, but taking  

note of the series of facts,  namely,  that the death  

was  homicidal  and  not  suicidal;  that  the  deceased  

was in the house of the husband and her dead body  

was found in the house; that the house was locked  

from outside and the husband had absconded; that  

there was no complaint by the husband with regard  

to the death of his wife; that the cross-examination of  

the  hostile  witnesses  would  indicate  that  the  

deceased and the accused were staying together and  

the incident occurred as per the FIR, Ex. P-1; that the  

4

Page 5

testimony of PWs-8 to 10 clearly established that the  

accused  was  suspecting  the  character  of  the  

deceased and had picked up quarrels alleging illicit  

intimacy with another person; that the suggestion on  

behalf  of  the  accused  that  there  was  violent  

intercourse on the deceased was found to be false on  

the  base  of  the  evidence  of  PW-11,  Dr.  Paul  Ravi  

Kumar;  that  from  the  evidence  of  PW-1,  

Dhanalakshmi,  it  was  quite  obvious  that  she  was  

aware of the death of Nagamani before she gave the  

report;  and that during the investigation,  Exs.  P-21  

and P-22 were found in the house of the accused and  

Ex. P-21 which was disputed to have been written by  

him was found to be false in view of the evidence of  

PW-15, K. Vani Prasada Rao, the hand-writing expert  

who had clearly stated that the writings in Ex. P-21  

were  that  of  the  accused and that  the  cumulative  

effect of all the circumstances did go a long way to  

show that the chain was complete to establish that it  

was  the  accused  and  the  accused  alone  who  had  

committed  the  crime  and  none  else,  and,  

5

Page 6

accordingly, convicted him under Section 302 of the  

IPC  and  sentenced  him  to  suffer  rigorous  

imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- in  

default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.  

5. On appeal being preferred, the Division Bench of the  

High  Court,  appreciating  the  evidence  brought  on  

record, concurred with the view of the learned trial  

Judge, regard being had to the circumstances which  

had been taken note of by him, especially that the  

premises was in exclusive possession of the accused;  

that the accused had lived with the deceased during  

that  night;  that  the door  was locked from outside;  

that the accused had absconded for a long time and,  

accordingly,  gave  the  stamp  of  approval  to  the  

judgment of conviction and order of sentence of the  

learned trial  Judge.   Hence,  the present  appeal  by  

way of special leave by the accused-appellant.

6. Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing  

for  the  appellant,  in  support  of  the  appeal,  has  

submitted  that  the  trial  court  as  well  as  the  High  

Court has erroneously come to the conclusion that  

6

Page 7

the chain of circumstances have proven the guilt of  

the  accused  though  on  a  proper  scrutiny  of  the  

evidence,  it  is  perceivable  that  there  are  many  a  

missing link in the version of the prosecution.  The  

learned counsel would submit that the very presence  

of the accused on the site and the foundation of the  

prosecution relating to harbouring of suspicion by the  

accused  relating  to  the  character  of  the  wife  are  

extremely  doubtful  and  cannot,  by  proper  

appreciation  of  evidence,  be  said  to  have  been  

proven.   It is urged by him that the circumstances  

have been stretched to an unimaginable length on  

the basis  of  surmises  and conjectures ignoring the  

relevant  facets  of  the  evidence,  more  importantly,  

that  there  was  amicable  relationship  between  the  

husband  and  wife  and  the  same  has  been  clearly  

borne out in the testimony of PWs  1 to 5 and 7.  It is  

his  further  submission  that  when  the  neighbours  

have not  supported the case of  the prosecution,  it  

was absolutely improper on the part of the learned  

trial  Judge  to  ignore  the  compatible  relationship  

7

Page 8

between the accused and the deceased and accept  

the prosecution version of suspicion by the husband  

on the basis of some sketchy material on record to  

proceed  to  the  ultimate  conclusion  for  finding  the  

accused guilty of the offence.   That apart,  submits  

the  learned  counsel  that  no  motive  has  been  

exhibited  to  rope  the  appellant  in  the  crime  and  

convict  him.    The  learned  counsel  would  

emphatically put  forth that the High Court has not  

appositely  appreciated  the  evidence  brought  on  

record  which  amounts  to  failure  of  the  legal  

obligation cast on the appellate Court and, therefore,  

both judgments of the appellate Court as well as of  

the  trial  Court  deserve  to  be  annulled  and  the  

appellant should be acquitted of the charge.   

7. Mr.  Shishir  Pinaki,  learned  counsel  for  the  State,  

resisting the aforesaid proponements of the learned  

counsel for the appellant, would contend that each of  

the circumstances has been properly weighed by the  

learned trial Judge and has been keenly scrutinized  

by the High Court and, hence, there is no perversity  

8

Page 9

of approach to nullify the judgment of conviction.  It  

is canvassed by him that the mere repetition by the  

neighbours  that  the  husband  and  wife  lived  in  an  

atmosphere of harmony and compatibility should not  

be given more credence than the testimony of the  

witnesses that there was suspicion in the mind of the  

husband, the presence of the husband in the house,  

his abscondence and absence of positive plea in the  

statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of  

Criminal  Procedure  and  the  injuries  found  on  the  

body of the deceased.   The learned counsel  would  

urge  with  immense  conviction  that  the  suspicion  

which  was  at  the  root  of  the  crime,  as  the  

circumstances unfold, shows the ultimate causation  

of death in a violent manner by the accused.  

8. To appreciate the rival submissions raised at the bar,  

it  is  obligatory  to  see  the  nature  of  the  injuries  

sustained  by  the  deceased  and  the  opinion  of  the  

doctor on the same.   PW-11,  Dr.  Paul  Ravi  Kumar,  

who had conducted the post mortem, has stated that  

9

Page 10

he  had  found  the  following  external  and  internal  

injuries on the dead body of the deceased: -

“External injuries:

There  is  bloody  discharge  coming  out  from both the nostrils.  Tongue tip bluish  in colour seen in between the upper and  lower teeth.  Lips blackish in colour with  diffuse  abrasions  over  both  the  lips.  Nose bluish discolour  tim present over  right nostril, ears – bluish black discolour  of the left pinna.

1. An  abrasion  of  4  x  2  cm  over  left  mandibular margin.

2. An  abrasion  of  ½ x  ½ cm over  left  upper lid.

3. An abrasion of 2 x ½ cm over right  leg anterior aspect.

4. A linear abrasion of 2 x 1/3 cm over  dorsum of right foot.

Internal injuries:

Neck  –  Hyoid  normal,  thyroid,  cricoid  cartligas  normal,  larynx  –  congested.  Trache  –  Bronchi  –  normal.   Lungs  –  Normal, cut section congested, stomach  –  normal  and  they  are  congested.  Intestines  distended  gases,  urinary  bladder empty.  Uterus – normal.  Scalp:  A diffuse contusion of 10 x 8 cm over  left occipto-partial region.  On reflexion  of scalp a diffuse hematoma of 8 x 8 cm  over left occipto partial region present.  Skull,  bones,  base  of  the  skull-normal.  Meninges – normal, brain – normal size  

10

Page 11

congested.   Spine  bones  of  the  extremities – normal.”

9. On the basis of the said injuries, he has expressed  

the opinion that the deceased had died of asphyxia  

as a result of smothering and the time of death was  

36  to  40  hours  prior  to  his  examination.   The  

aforesaid  injuries  and  the  opinion  has  clearly  

revealed  that  the  death  was  homicidal.   In  

examination-in-chief,  he  has  deposed  that  the  

external injuries mentioned by him vide Ex. P-8 are  

possible when a person places a pillow on the face  

and presses and the result is struggle.  In the cross-

examination, it has been suggested to him that the  

injuries  recorded  by  him  could  be  possibly  by  

participating  in  violent  sexual  intercourse  but  the  

same has been categorically denied.  Thus, there can  

be no iota of doubt that the death was homicidal and  

not suicidal and further it was not a case of rape and  

murder.  

10. Once it is held that the death was homicidal and the  

injuries  were  not  the  result  of  any  violent  sexual  

11

Page 12

intercourse, the circumstances are to be scrutinized  

to see the complicity of the accused in the crime.

11. First,  we  shall  advert  to  the  issue  whether  the  

suspicion  relating  to  the  illicit  relationship  by  the  

accused-appellant has been established.  True it is,  

the neighbours, PWs-1 to 5, who have turned hostile,  

have  stated  that  the  husband  and  wife  had  an  

amicable  relationship  but  the  version  of  the  other  

witnesses project otherwise.  From the testimony of  

PW-8, Triveni, the younger sister of the deceased, it  

is  apparent  that  on  1.10.2000,  the  deceased  had  

come to their  house at  Hindupur and had told her  

that the accused was harassing her on the pretext  

that  she  had  developed  illicit  relationship  with  

someone and was not providing her food.  She has  

deposed that she advised the deceased that quarrels  

are  common  in  family  life  and  she  should  adjust  

herself  and,  accordingly,  she  went  back  to  her  

husband.  In the cross-examination, nothing has been  

elicited to discredit her testimony.  

12

Page 13

12. PW-9, P. Gangappa, another relative of the deceased,  

has  deposed  about  the  deceased  agonisedly  

describing before him the harassment meted out to  

her  by  her  husband  on  the  excuse  that  she  had  

developed illicit intimacy with someone.  There has  

been absolutely no cross-examination on this score.  

13. In view of the aforesaid, we are disposed to think that  

the  accused,  for  whatever  reason,  had  garnered  

suspicion against  the attitude and character  of  his  

wife.  We may hasten to add that PW-7, who in his  

161 Statement had stated that the accused has told  

him  about  the  anguish  relating  to  his  wife’s  

character,  though has turned hostile,  yet the same  

would  not  make  any  difference  to  arrive  at  the  

conclusion on the basis of the evidence of PWs-8 and  

9  that  he  had  a  suspicious  mind  as  regards  the  

character of his wife.  

14. Presently, we shall proceed to consider certain other  

circumstances. It has been established on the basis  

of the material on record that the premises had been  

taken on rent by the accused and Imamvalli from the  

13

Page 14

landlady,  PW-1.   PW-1  has  admitted  that  she  had  

given the accused a portion of the house on rental  

basis.  PW-5, son of Imamvalli, has admitted that the  

accused and his  wife  were  residing on  rent  in  the  

next portion of their house.  Thus, they were close  

neighbours.   PW-1 in  her  evidence has stated that  

she was not aware if the deceased was alive or not.  

The  learned  trial  Judge  has  commented  on  her  

conduct which we need not further expatiate.  The  

fact remains that she has deposed that when she got  

up in the morning, she found that there was some  

commotion  in  the  portion  which  she had given  on  

rent and it  was informed to her that someone had  

died.  It is interesting to note that she has admitted  

the FIR Ex. P-1.  In the cross-examination, she has  

also admitted that the contents of Ex. P-1 were read  

over and explained to her before she signed it.  PW-5  

has deposed that Nagamani, the deceased, had died  

about  6.30  a.m.,  when  PW-1,  the  landlady,  was  

shouting.   PW-12,  N.  Babu Naidu,  the councillor  of  

26th Ward,  has  stated  that  after  coming  to  know  

14

Page 15

about  the  death  of  the  deceased,  he  went  to  her  

house and found it locked and the same was opened  

after the police came and  the dead body was found  

on  the  ground  with  a  pillow  on  her  face.   His  

testimony has gone undented, for nothing has been  

put to him in the cross-examination except that he  

was making efforts to oblige the police.  It has come  

in the evidence of PW-13, the Investigating Officer,  

that the lock was broke open in the presence of the  

witnesses and the dead body was found in the room.  

He  has  spoken  about  the  seizure  of  Ex.  P-21,  the  

writing  of  the  accused  on  a  book.   In  the  cross-

examination, apart from a singular question relating  

to the Inquest Report, nothing has been asked.

15. At this juncture, it  is apt to note that PW-1, in the  

cross-examination, has stated that she had gone to  

Sai  Baba  Bhajan.   The  said  aspect  has  not  been  

believed  by  the  learned  trial  Judge  and  we  are  

inclined  to  think  correctly.   On  the  contrary,  the  

circumstances have clearly established that she was  

in her house.  The evidence on record clearly shows  

15

Page 16

that there was a commotion in the morning, she had  

lodged  the  FIR,  the  police  arrived  and  found  the  

house locked from outside and it was broke open in  

the presence of the witnesses.   It  is  worthwhile to  

note that the accused did not take the plea of alibi.  

On  the  contrary,  the  factum  of  abscondence  has  

been  proven.   Under  these  circumstances,  the  

cumulative effect is that the husband was present in  

the house when the death of the wife occurred.  The  

suggestion of rape and murder which has been put in  

the form of violent sexual act has been found to be  

untrue on the basis of medical evidence and there is  

no  reason  to  differ  with  the  said  finding.   The  

husband has not come with any explanation where  

he was on the fateful night and how the door was  

locked.   As  has  been  stated  earlier,  he  had  

absconded for long.  He has not taken any step to  

report  the  unnatural  death  of  his  wife.   From the  

aforesaid  aspects,  the  circumstances  soundly  

establish  that  the  deceased  was  with  the  accused  

during the night, there was a locking of the door from  

16

Page 17

outside which could not have been done by anyone  

else except him and further he absconded from the  

scene of the crime and did not report to the police.  

Thus,  the  irresistible  and inescapable conclusion  is  

that the accused was the culprit  in committing the  

murder of his wife.

16. Now,  we  may  deal  with  the  submission  that  the  

prosecution has not been able to prove any motive  

for  the  commission  of  the  crime  because  the  

suspicion on the part of the husband has not been  

established.   We  have  already  recorded  an  

affirmative finding on that score.  However, we may,  

in  this  context,   profitably  refer  to  the  

pronouncement  in  Nathuni Yadav and others  v.  

State of Bihar and another1 wherein a two-Judge  

Bench has laid down thus: -

“17. Motive  for  doing  a  criminal  act  is  generally a difficult area for prosecution.  One cannot normally see into the mind of  another.  Motive  is  the  emotion  which  impels a man to do a particular act. Such  impelling cause need not necessarily be  proportionally grave to do grave crimes.  Many  a  murders  have  been  committed  

1 (1998) 9 SCC 238

17

Page 18

without any known or prominent motive.  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  aforesaid  impelling  factor  would  remain  undiscoverable.  Lord  Chief  Justice  Champbell struck a note of caution in  R.  v. Palmer2 thus:

“But if there be any motive which  can be assigned,  I  am bound to tell  you that the adequacy of that motive  is of little importance. We know, from  experience  of  criminal  courts  that  atrocious  crimes  of  this  sort  have  been  committed  from  very  slight  motives; not merely from malice and  revenge,  but  to  gain  a  small  pecuniary advantage, and to drive off  for a time pressing difficulties.”

Though,  it  is  a  sound  proposition  that  every criminal act is done with a motive,  it  is  unsound  to  suggest  that  no  such  criminal  act  can  be  presumed  unless  motive  is  proved.  After  all,  motive is  a  psychological  phenomenon.  Mere  fact  that prosecution failed to translate that  mental  disposition  of  the  accused  into  evidence  does  not  mean  that  no  such  mental condition existed in the mind of  the assailant.”  

17. In the said case, it was also observed that in some  

cases,  it  may  not  be  difficult  to  establish  motive  

through direct evidence, while in some other cases,  

inferences  from  circumstances  may  help  in  

discerning  the  mental  propensity  of  the  person  

concerned.  In the case at hand, as is noticed, there  2 Shorthand Report at p. 308 CCC May 1856

18

Page 19

is material on record which suggests that there was  

some  ire  that  had  swelled  up  in  the  mind  of  the  

accused to extinguish the life spark of the wife.

18. It is to be borne in mind that suspicion pertaining to  

fidelity  has  immense  potentiality  to  commit  

irreversible  wrongs  as  it  corrupts  the  mind  and  

corrodes the sense of  rational  thinking and further  

allows liberty to the mind to pave the path of evil.  In  

fact,  it  brings  in  baseness.   It  quite  often impures  

mind, takes it to the devil’s den and leads one to do  

unjust acts than just deeds.  In any case, it does not  

give licence to commit murder.  Thus, the submission  

pertaining  to  the  absence  of  motive  has  no  

substance.

19. In view of the aforesaid analysis,  we conclude and  

hold that all  the links in the chain of evidence are  

established  beyond  reasonable  doubt  and  the  

established  circumstances  are  consistent  with  the  

singular hypothesis that the accused is guilty of the  

crime and it is totally inconsistent with his innocence.  

We have said so on the basis of the pronouncements  

19

Page 20

in  Sharad  Birdhichand  Sarda  v.  State  of  

Maharashtra3, Padala Veera Reddy  v.  State of  

Andhra Pradesh and ors.4,  Balwinder Singh  v.  

State of Punjab5, Harischandra Ladaku Thange  

v.  State of Maharashtra6 and  Jagroop Singh  v.  

State of Punjab7.

20. Consequently,  the  appeal,  being  sans  substratum,  

stands dismissed.  

    ……………………………….J. [K. S. Radhakrishnan]

……………………………….J.                                            [Dipak Misra] New Delhi; April 04, 2013

3 AIR 1984 SC 1622 4 AIR 1990 SC 79 5 AIR 1996 SC 607 6 AIR 2007 SC 2957 7 AIR 2012 SC 2600

20