State of Maharashtra v. Lahu, (2013) 10 SCC 292
Penal Code, 1860
Ss. 363, 364-A, 386, 302 and 201 - Kidnapping, extortion and murder - Circumstantial evidence - Identification of
accused duly established - Chain of circumstances pointing only to guilt of respondent-accused - Conviction restored -
Victim aged about 3 yrs was studying in Junior KG - He went to school, but did not return - His class teacher informed his
father that he left school with a person aged about 25 yrs - Ransom call was received by aggrieved family, but child was
not released even after payment - Father, with the help of police, found out STD booth from where phone call was made -
Accused, after kidnapping the child from school, had gone to paan shop and purchased some chocolates - On the same
day he killed the child and made phone calls from different telephone booths - Bag and shirt of child recovered on
statement given by accused - Accused had opened a account and deposited a sum of Rs 40,000 - STD booth owners
PWs 15, 26 and 28 also identified accused - Trial court convicted respondent-accused - High Court doubted evidence of
both teachers and observed that it is probable that they identified accused from photograph published in newspaper -
High Court also rejected evidence of paanwala - Held, discovery of various articles at the instance of accused, entries of
Telephone Department showing calls made to father, opening of bank account and deposit of money coupled with
evidence of independent witnesses, namely, two teachers, paanwala and STD booth owners, complete the chain of
circumstances which clearly point towards guilt of accused - High Court erred in acquitting him, (2013) 10 SCC 292-A
Independent witness - No reason for false implication - PW 4 was the class teacher of Junior KG class, where victim
aged about 3 yrs was studying - Victim had come to school on fateful day and when nobody turned up to take him back
till noon, PW 4 brought the child in verandah of school - According to PW 4 at 12.30 p.m. accused came in school, called
the victim, whereupon he ran towards the accused - On enquiry, victim told PW 4 that he knew the accused and in this
way victim went along with him - PW 4 stated the manner in which she identified accused in TIP held by Tahsildar - In
cross-examination she admitted that photograph of accused was published in newspaper and on same day TIP was held
- Similarly, PW 9 another teacher had deposed about manner in which victim was taken by accused - She also testified
about identification of accused in TIP - She denied suggestion that she had identified accused at the instance of police -
Held, these two teachers had neither any grudge to grind against accused nor has anything to that effect been suggested
by defence in cross-examination - These two teachers were absolutely independent persons - There was no reason as to
why they would falsely identify accused in TIP - So, identification of accused by these teachers cannot be doubted - High
Court's finding that possibility of their identification on basis of photograph published in newspaper cannot be ruled out,
not acceptable, (2013) 10 SCC 292-B
Evidence Act, 1872
S. 9 - Identification - Limits of human memory - Paan shop owner (PW 5) emphatically stated that accused had come to
his shop along with a child who was weeping, purchased chocolates and gave them to the child - PW 5 may not be
expected to remember each and every customer after 8 months, but the fact of the matter is that in the case in hand he
had identified the accused and, in absence of any evidence to contrary, his evidence was not fit to be rejected only on
ground of question of Limits of human memory,
No comments:
Post a Comment