Summary
A Bathinda milk vendor was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly poisoning milk bought by a neighbour's son. The neighbour's wife died after drinking it, and the prosecution's motive was that the vendor owed her husband Rs. 1 lakh. The Supreme Court acquitted him. He denied the loan, the original pronote was never produced and no attesting witness was examined. There was a gap of over 24 hours between buying the milk and police collecting samples, giving others the chance to add poison. Organophosphorus has a strong pungent smell, yet no one noticed it while boiling or drinking the milk, and the autopsy doctor found no signs of poisoning. The samples reached the chemical examiner as an 'opened case' with cuttings in the reports, and the vendor's possession of poison was never investigated.
Issues
- Whether, on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution proved that the appellant poisoned milk supplied to the deceased's family
- Whether the essential circumstances for a conviction in a poisoning case were established, namely motive, death by poison, possession of poison and opportunity
Provisions considered
- Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860The murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence of poisoning was set aside because the chain of circumstances was incomplete. (¶¶ 48, 49)
Held
- In a case resting on circumstantial evidence, the Sharad Birdhichand Sarda tests apply. The circumstances must be fully established, consistent only with guilt and exclude every other hypothesis. In poisoning cases, motive, death by poison, possession of the poison and opportunity must all be proved, and suspicion cannot replace proof. (¶¶ 35, 37, 38, 39)
- The motive was not proved. The appellant denied the loan, the trial court wrongly assumed he had admitted the pronote, the original was not produced and no attesting witness was examined. His defence of a counter-claim in the informant's chit business made false implication possible. (¶¶ 33, 41, 42)
- With over 24 hours between buying the milk and the police seizure, the chance of someone else adding poison could not be excluded. Organophosphorus has a strong pungent smell, yet the family noticed none, and the autopsy surgeon found no smell, discolouration or other sign of poisoning, suggesting another cause of death. (¶¶ 34, 43, 44)
- The chemical examiner received the samples as an 'opened case' after another officer's suspension, with cuttings in both reports and a missing reference to one viscera jar, so tampering could not be ruled out. Possession of the poison was never investigated, and the chain had many missing links. (¶¶ 45, 46, 47, 48)
Result
Appeal allowed; the conviction under Section 302 IPC and life sentence were set aside, the appellant was acquitted and his bail bonds discharged.