State of Chattisgarh  INSC 1230 (16 July 2009)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 511 OF 2005 PRAHLAD .. APPELLANT(S)
OR DER We
have heard learned counsel for the parties.
This is a
case which is based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances being the
extra judicial confession made by the accused primarily before PW.1 - Sanjay
and PW.2 Manohar Lal Sahu, who has been declared hostile; the medical evidence
which indicates the presence of ligature marks on the neck of the deceased
which shows that death was asphyxia due to strangulation which seemed to be
homicidal; the fact that the defence taken by the accused that it was a case of
suicide was not corroborated by the medical evidence and that in addition to
the accused the only two other persons present in the house where his father
and his wife (the deceased) and finally that the accused did not report the
death to the police for almost 36 hours.
learned counsel for the appellant has, however, submitted that the chain of
circumstances envisaged for recording a conviction in a case of circumstantial
evidence had not been spelt out, and that an extra judicial confession was weak
evidence. We find no merit in the submissions. In the light of the broad
findings referred to above more particularly that the death was due to
strangulation and not by hanging as suggested by the defence and as there was
nobody in the house except the accused and his father at the time the incident
happened, some valid explanation for the death of the deceased had to be
provided. Admittedly that is not the case.
view of the matter we find the chain of circumstances which have been found
against the accused, proves the case of the prosecution. Accordingly the appeal
.................J. (HARJIT SINGH BEDI)
.................J. (J.M. PANCHAL)
July 16, 2009.