Aastha Thakur
Published on: 22 October 2022 at 19:01 IST
Punjab and Haryana High Court while hearing the case of murder on the basis of circumstantial evidence, upheld the lower court’s decision finding a series of circumstances clearly showing the appellant’s guilt.
Justices Sureshwar Thakur and NS Shekhawat noted that when links in the chain of incriminatory circumstances stand established by the prosecution, then inconclusiveness of serologist’s opinion about blood stains on the murder weapon and clothes of accused becomes insignificant.
The court also noted that FSL report not give any definite opinion about the blood carried on the relevant items belonging to the blood group of the deceased.
It observed that the FSL report does not disclose any conclusive opinion about the blood carried on the relevant items belonging to the blood group of the deceased. However, it opined that the aforementioned serologist’s uncertainty in his assessment did not compromise the force of the established incriminating connections in the chain of incriminating circumstances.
“The reason becomes comprised in the factum, that only if the investigating officer concerned, had collected the FTM card, revealing the blood group of the deceased, rather from the latter’s family members, thereupon alone, the serologist concerned, would become facilitated to make an apposite best comparison(s) or matchings, otherwise not, and, if yet an opinion favourable to the accused hence arose, thereupon may be a finding of acquittal was renderable.”
“However, since the investigating officer concerned, has not done so, resultantly, the inconclusivity of opinion, if any, by the serologist concerned, about the blood stains thereons’, rather not relating to the blood group of the deceased, rather not foisting any firm conclusion that hence any exculpatory finding, is required, to be made qua the convict. Contrarily the making of opinion (supra), becomes completely irrelevant.“
The court was hearing the appeal matter against the order of Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar sentencing the accused to life imprisonment for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.
The appellant is alleged to have killed one Munna, because of prior hatred, according to relevant facts in the case.
The court noted that the brother of the deceased (PW-3) furnished evidence in his examination-in-chief that he witnessed the incident in which the deceased demanded payment for the eggs that the appellant consumed from his rehri and the appellant pulled a knife from his pocket. The court also noted that another incident in which the accused was seen holding a bottle of alcohol and a knife while the deceased was following him after which he was found dead.
The court noted that as the PW-3 saw the deceased person with the accused, it will amount to primary incriminatory link, hence almost close to the discovering of the dead body of deceased.
However, PW-3 had not seen the accused attacking the deceased, the Court relied on post mortem report which discloses the cause of death was due to multiple injuries to internal organs, possibly inflicted by a knife.
The weapon was also discovered later on from a concealed spot at accused house following a disclosure statement. The appellant neither contested this assertion nor the recovery. The Court concluded that the confession is valid for use as evidence as a result.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: Anil Versus State of Haryana