Priya Gour
Published on: 12th August, 2022 at 18:11 IST
The Supreme Court on Thursday held that a murder accused cannot be convicted merely on the ground of strong suspicion and thereby, acquitted him.
A bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and P.S. Narasimha said:
“It is settled law that the suspicion, however strong it may be, cannot take the place of proof beyond reasonable doubt. An accused cannot be convicted on the ground of suspicion, no matter how strong it is. An accused is presumed to be innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
About the Case:
Ram Niwas was convicted of murder in and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2005. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had dismissed the appeal of his conviction in 2009. For challenging the High Court’s order, the petitioner had moved to the apex court.
The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Rishi Malhotra, submitted that it could not proved that the dead body on which the post-mortem was conducted was surely of the deceased person, Dalip Singh.
It was also submitted before the bench that it was admitted by doctor (who carried out the post-mortem) that the face of the body was not recognisable. So, the conviction can not be held true if the prosecution fails to prove that the body was of deceased Dalip Singh. It could not also be established that the death was homicidal through post mortem.
The bench opined that there has to be a chain of evidence which leaves no ground of suspicion. However, in the present case, it has not been efficiently proved that in all human probability, the act must have been committed by the accused.
“It has been held that the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency. This court has held that the circumstances should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved. It has been held that the accused ‘must be’ and not merely ‘may be’ guilty before a court can convict him.”
The bench was of the view the the prosecution could not establish the chain of events which would only prove of one event, i.e., the guilt of the accused. The prosecution failed to do so. The court permitted to admit the said appeal.
Resultantly, court quashed and set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant, and acquitted him of all charges.