Summary
The Court reversed acquittal of two police personnel for a custodial death, finding the circumstantial evidence and falsified station records incompatible with their alibi. It convicted them under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC and imposed ten years’ rigorous imprisonment. It confined consideration to that offence and sentence, declining to examine reopening the unchallenged murder acquittal.
Issues
- Whether the circumstantial evidence proved the respondents’ responsibility for the custodial injuries and death.
- Whether their alibi and station-diary entries were credible.
- What sentence was appropriate and whether the murder acquittal should be examined.
Held
- The State had not appealed the 2002 acquittal under Section 302, acting on legal opinion. In the circumstances the Court declined to address its power to reopen that acquittal and confined the appeals to Section 304 Part II with Section 34 and sentence. (¶ 2–5)
- Missing diary pages, overwriting of the departure entry, inconsistency with the hospital memo and the lack of a recorded contemporaneous explanation made the alibi unacceptable. The constable’s claimed departure depended on the same rejected account as the inspector’s. (¶ 9–11)
- The deceased entered custody in good condition apart from minor arrest injuries, remained with the respondents, and soon died with numerous fresh fatal injuries that could not be self-inflicted. With no cogent explanation and the alibi rejected, the circumstances established their responsibility to the exclusion of others despite absence of an eyewitness. (¶ 6–12)
- Custodial killing by police personnel, fabrication of records, the false alibi and the false hospital memo justified the maximum punishment for the offence: ten years’ rigorous imprisonment for both respondents. (¶ 13)
Result
State’s appeals allowed; acquittal set aside, both respondents convicted under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to ten years’ rigorous imprisonment, with immediate surrender directed.