In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has quashed and set aside the convictions of the accused appellant in the State Of M.P. v. HANSRAJ. The court cited the absence of substantial evidence linking the accused to the alleged crime, leading to the acquittal. Learn more about this landmark decision in criminal justice.
Facts
- The appellant was arrested on 14 December, 1998 based on suspicion.
- Accused made a confession/disclosure statement which was recorded as Memorandum (Exhibit P-11).
- The Investigating Officer recovered the stolen silver articles based on the disclosure statement.
- The stolen articles were identified by the complainant before an Executive Magistrate.
- Charge sheet was filed against the accused for the mentioned offences.
- The trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant.
- The High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, rejecting the appeal.
- The appellant challenged the judgment dated October 20, 1999, passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur, M.P.
- The appellant was convicted for offenses under Sections 394 read with Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
- The appellant was sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 1,000.
- In default of payment of the fine, further rigorous imprisonment of three months was imposed.
- The appeal against this judgment was filed on December 21, 2022, and was dismissed by the learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court Bench at Indore.
- The appeal was filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Also Read: Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar vs. State of Karnataka
Arguments
- The submissions by learned counsel for the appellant and the Deputy Advocate General for the State were carefully considered.
- The trial court’s finding of the jewellery being seized based on information provided by the appellant was upheld.
Also Read: State of West Bengal vs. Jayeeta Das: Jurisdictional Issues in UAPA Cases
Analysis
- The prosecution failed to prove the factum of disclosure made by the accused to the Investigating Officer leading to the recovery of the silver articles allegedly looted by the accused.
- The identification of the recovered ornaments by the complainant during the test identification proceedings was unreliable as she admitted that the police officers identified her jewelry which she then recognized.
- The accused’s confession leading to recovery was not proved as the Investigating Officer did not narrate the exact words spoken by the accused during the disclosure statement and did not mention that the accused led him to the hidden articles.
- The lack of proper proof regarding the disclosure memo and discovery of facts made in pursuance thereof rendered such evidence inadmissible.
- The case against the accused was primarily based on the recovery of the ornaments, with no other substantial evidence connecting the accused to the crime.
- The identification of the accused by the complainant during the Court proceedings was not relied upon by the trial Court and the High Court.
- No evidence was presented to show that the recovered articles were sealed at the time of recovery or kept secure in the police station malkhana until identification by the Executive Magistrate.
- Lack of tangible or reliable evidence to affirm the guilt of the accused appellant
- Trial Court’s decision upheld by the High Court without substantial evidence
- Judgement questions the basis of the conviction
- Absence of concrete proof to validate the allegations against the accused
Also Read: Kirpal Singh vs. State of Punjab and Haryana
Decision
- The appeal has been allowed.
- The judgments from the trial court and High Court have been quashed and set aside.
- The accused appellant has been acquitted.
- If not required in any other case, the appellant in jail will be released immediately.
- Any pending application(s) have been disposed of.
Case Title: HANSRAJ Vs. STATE OF M.P. (2024 INSC 318)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-002143-002143 / 2024
