Ramcharan Patel Vs. State of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Criminal Appeal, 1066 of 1998, Judgment Date: Jan 07, 2021

Law laid down -

(1) Section 302, 120B and Section 201 of IPC : Vikki Bai was not traceable from matrimonial house and hence her father-in-law lodged "Gum Insaan" report in Police Station. Father of Vikki Bai also lodged the report that she is murdered by appellants. Body or remains of Vikki Bai could never be traced. The court below held the appellants as guilty on the basis of circumstantial evidence.

Held : Conclusion of guilt must be based on circumstances fully established.

(2) Circumstantial Evidence :- The chain of evidence must be so complete as to leave no ground and doubt for conclusion in favour of innocence of accused. It must be established that in all human probabilities that act must have been done by the accused.

(3) Suspicion and Proof :- Suspicion however strong it may be, cannot take the place of proof. If two views are possible on the basis of evidence on record, one which favours the accused must be followed.

(4) Burden of Proof :- The initial burden to prove its case is on the shoulders of the prosecution. If this burden is duly discharged, onus shifts on the defence. If prosecution has failed to discharge its aforesaid burden, no adverse inference can be drawn against the defence because two witnesses who could have supported the defence that appellant No.1 was taking treatment, were not examined.

Ramcharan Patel Vs. State of M.P.