High Court of Bombay in one its recent judgments allowed an appeal and set aside wrongful conviction of on accused on basis of no sufficient evidence.
Two-Judge Bench of Sadhna s. Jadhav & Milind n. Jadhav, acquitted an accused who appealed against the Trial Court judgment of affirming his conviction and rigorous imprisonment forced upon him for the alleged offence of murder and directed he to be set free forthwith.
Brief Facts of the Case
In case of Suresh Ladak Bhagat vs. The State of Maharashtra , the appellant is an accused and has been convicted of R.I for life under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. A man named Laxman daji ,also a witness, lodged a report against the accused after investigating an information received by him ,that the accused has killed his wife Lalita Bhagat on his premises.
Upon investigation, the witness went to the alleged spot of murder and found the accused seated beside the dead body of his wife and subsequently informed the police, post which an FIR was registered against the accused and the trail court convicted him on the basis of an extra- judicial confession made by the accused to Laxman daji. Aggrieved by the said conviction, the appellant filed an appeal before the High court .
Counsel’s Submissions:
• Counsel for appellant has submitted that witness laxman doji , turned hostile and so as the other subsequent witnesses, who denied in court to have given any statements to police.
• He further submits that the contents of spot punchnama did not show as when the punchnama was conducted and the only implicating situation was that the accused was cited seated behind the dead body of his wife.
• That the case holds no evidence and the accused must be discharged and acquitted of all the charges evened out against him.
Counsel for the state submits that the accused did not provide for a relevant explanation to the crime where he was cited seated behind the dead body of his wife , which is sufficient to convict
him. He further submits that an extra judicial confession was made by him which is a plausible evidence against him.
High Court's Observations:
High Court of Bombay while adjudicating the matter, focussed on Section 3 of Indian Evidence Act and observed that the prosecution based its case on the extra judicial confession made by the accused to the witness ,which cannot be relied upon as he retracted from his previous assertions and eventually turned hostile.
The Court negated state’s submissions of putting forward a plausible explanation by the accused under Section 106 of Indian evidence act and contended that Section 106 states that unless the
prosecution provides strong proofs against the accused the onus will not be shifted upon him to explain the alleged circumstances. Further court noted that the evidentiary documents submitted and relied upon by the state’s counsel could not make inference to as to whether the accused committed injuries to the deceased or not.
The court referred to the supreme court judgment in case of State of Rajasthan vs. Rajaram where it was stated that “an extra-judicial confession, if voluntary and true and made in a fit state of mind, can be relied upon by the Court. The confession will have to be proved like any other fact. The value of the evidence as to confession, like any other evidence, depends upon the veracity of the witness to whom it has made. The value of the evidence depends on the reliability of the witness who gives the evidence.”
With the above statement the court contended that extra judicial confession in the present case is a weak link and would not be in accordance of law and would be disproved. Court allowed the appeal and quashed the judgment of additional sessions with directions of acquittal of the accused.
CASE TITLE: Suresh Ladak Bhagat vs. The State of Maharashtra
CASE DETAILS: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.9 OF 2014 ,Judgment passed on 19th APRIL, 2022
CORAM: J. Sadhna s. Jadhav & J. Milind n. Jadhav
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com:
Share this Document :Picture Source :
