Summary
The Supreme Court set aside the convictions of Babu Lal and Devi Lal in a murder and conspiracy case resting on circumstantial evidence. The alleged extra-judicial confession lacked cogent corroboration and had not appeared in the witness’s earlier statement; the torn ledger-leaf evidence also presented unresolved defects. The cumulative chain raised suspicion but did not exclude reasonable innocence. Both appellants received the benefit of doubt.
Issues
- Whether the circumstantial evidence formed a complete chain proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether the alleged extra-judicial confession and ledger-leaf recoveries sustained the convictions.
Held
- The alleged extra-judicial confession required cautious assessment. It was absent from the witness’s Section 164 statement and lacked additional cogent supporting circumstances. (¶ 9)
- The ledger itself was not produced to establish the provenance of the torn leaf, and the ink comparison was doubtful in light of the forensic objection and investigating officer’s evidence. These circumstances did not cure the gaps in the prosecution chain. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12, 13)
- Circumstances must be fully established, conclusive, consistent only with guilt and exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence. The entire chain must be evaluated collectively; suspicion, however grave, cannot replace proof. Here the chain remained incomplete and incoherent. (¶¶ 14, 15, 16, 17)
- Both convictions were unsustainable. Devi Lal’s bail bonds were discharged and Babu Lal was directed to be released forthwith unless required in another case. (¶ 18)
Result
Both appeals allowed; convictions set aside on benefit of doubt. Devi Lal’s bail bonds discharged; Babu Lal to be released forthwith unless required in another case.