The Division Bench of Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Vikram Nath of the Apex Court in the case of Indrajit Das Vs The State of Tripura expounded that the extra-judicial confession is weak evidence, especially when it is recorded at the trial stage. Strong evidence must corroborate it.
It was further opined that the circumstances should have a clear tendency to point inherently towards the Accused's guilt; they should add up to form a chain of events that is so convincing that it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Accused committed the crime within the realm of reasonable doubt; they should also be unexplainable under any other hypothesis than the Accused's guilt and inconsistent with his innocence.
Brief Facts:
One Mantu Das informed the police via telephone message that a huge quantity of blood was found on a road near Shantipur. A blood-stained knife, one thread and some broken pieces of glass along with the blood on the roadside were found. While the investigation was still in progress, information was received that one Kaushik Sarkar was missing since the previous evening.
Thereafter, the Investigating Officer approached Kaushik’s mother and recorded her statement in which she said that Kaushik had gone out with his two friends namely Indrajit Das (Appellant) and one ‘juvenile K’.
The Investigating Officer went to the house of the Appellant. As per the Investigating Officer, both the Accused confessed that they had bought a bottle of alcohol on the way and had it while they were travelling. In response to the urge to answer the call of nature, they got down. The motorcycle had Kaushik seated on it. The Accused then used their knife to attack the deceased.
The Trial Court held that the prosecution fully established the guilt beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced the Appellant to imprisonment for life. Aggrieved by this, the Appellant preferred the appeal before the High Court and the High Court supported the decision of the Trial court. Hence, the present appeal.
Observations of the Court:
The Hon’ble Court observed that the law regarding the case of circumstantial evidence is well settled and opined that the circumstances should have a clear tendency to point inherently towards the Accused's guilt; they should add up to form a chain of events that is so convincing that it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Accused committed the crime within the realm of reasonable doubt; they should also be unexplainable under any other hypothesis than the Accused's guilt and inconsistent with his innocence.
It was further observed that,
“The basic links in the chain of circumstances start with motive, then move on to last seen theory, recovery, medical evidence, expert opinions if any, and any other additional link which may be part of the chain of circumstances.”
It was noted that the Prosecution didn’t establish the motive behind the act committed by the Appellant. It was ruled that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the motive has an important role. Further, the dead body was not recovered. Hence, the case rests on the Presumption that Kaushik Sarkar has died.
The Bench added that the conviction was entirely based on extra-judicial confession. It was expounded that the extra-judicial confession is weak evidence, especially when it is recorded at the trial stage. Strong evidence must corroborate it.In the present case, nothing corroborated the confession. Moreover, the confession was contradictory to the prosecution’s evidence.
The decision of the Court:
Based on the aforementioned reasons, the Supreme Court acquitted the Appellant of all the charges. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.
Case Title: Indrajit Das Vs The State of Tripura
Coram-Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai , Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath
Case No. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.609 OF 2015
Citation: 2023 Latest Caselaw 154 SC
Advocate for Appellant: Adv. Madhumita Bhattacharjee
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Shuvodeep Roy
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :