Mumbai : Observing that in cases resting on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to establish and prove the circumstance on which it proposes to rely. The Bombay High Court has quashed and set aside the conviction of a man who was convicted for killing his wife.
“The prosecution has not been able to establish that the accused was present in the village and was seen near the scene of the incident i.e. his house from 12/3/2006. None of the witnesses examined by the prosecution unerringly establish the presence of the appellant and consequently, merely because of finding of the dead body of the wife of accused in the house, presumption cannot be drawn that it was the appellant who had committed the crime,” said a division bench headed by justice P V Hardas while acquitting the accused.
“The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature .The circumstances so proved should form a complete chain which should exclude every hypothesis of the innocence of the accused. The circumstances so proved should be capable of only one inference and that is, it is the accused and the accused alone had committed the crime.
In the present case, the evidence of the prosecution falls woefully short of establishing the said chain which excludes every hypothesis of the innocence of the accused. We, therefore, find that the prosecution has failed in establishing the offence against the appellant and the appellant, therefore, in our opinion, would be entitled to be given the benefit of doubt,” the court further noted.
The court was hearing an appeal filed by Sudam Javle challenging his conviction and life term awarded by the Pune sessions court.
The wife of the accused was found murdered in house. The prosecution alleged that the accused had killed her. The deceased had earlier filed a case of domestic violence against the accused.
