BOMBAY HC - SUSPICION IS NOT CONSIDERED A LEGAL PROOF

The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court recently observed that suspicion cannot be considered legal proof. The Bench of Justices VK Jadhav and SK More made the observations while acquitting a person imprisoned with life imprisonment in a murder case. 

The Bench was hearing an appeal by Avdhoot Ghate, a laborer from Jalgaon. In 2012, Avdhoot Ghate was alleged of killing a co-worker by smashing his head during a drunken quarrel. After the trial, the Sessions Court found sentences Ghate. 

In the present appeal, he argued that there was no direct evidence to prove the chain of events. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. Moreover, the prosecution even failed to establish his motive behind the murder.

Meanwhile, the prosecutor relied upon the confession made by Ghate and recorded by a Special Judicial Magistrate. Further, the prosecutor also claimed that the witnesses identified Ghate during the identification parade.

The Bench concluded that the evidence against the accused entirely relied upon the circumstantial evidence. In such cases, motive plays an important part, which was absent in the present case. Moreover, the identification parade was not executed in the manner prescribed under the criminal manual. Lastly, the confessional statement was not voluntary and did not corroborate by other material. The Magistrate purportedly gave the accused 24 hours to rethink the confession, and in that way, the Magistrate concluded that the nature of the confession was voluntary.

The Bench set aside the order of the Sessions Court after observing that the prosecution failed to establish the chain of circumstances against the accused.

Author: Papiha Ghoshal