New Delhi:
Coming to the rescue of a man, who was initially awarded death sentence which was later commute to life term, the Supreme Court Friday acquitted him in a murder case lodged in 2008 in Madhya Pradesh by giving him benefit of doubt.
The man, along with two others, was awarded death penalty by a trial court which had convicted them for the offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including 302 (murder) read with 34 (common intention).
Later, the Madhya Pradesh High Court had in 2012 said that death penalty was not warranted in the case and sentenced the man and two others to life imprisonment.
The man had approached the apex court in 2013 challenging the high court’s verdict and contended that there was no evidence against him in the case.
In its 43-page verdict, a bench of Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said that the man was found guilty of offences, including murder, based on the recovery of mobile phone of the victim but the recovery itself “suffers from suspicion and doubt”.
“In the facts of this case, we are inclined to think that it would not be safe to uphold the conviction of the appellant,” the bench said.
“He would be entitled to the benefit of doubt. We allow the appeal. The impugned judgment (of the high court) in so far as it relates to the appellant will stand set aside and he will stand acquitted,” the apex court said.
According to the police, the accused persons had entered a house to commit loot or theft in September 2008 and they murdered a man who was residing along there.
The police had alleged that several stolen articles were recovered from the possession of accused persons who were arrested during the probe.
During the arguments in the apex court, the counsel appearing for the petitioner had contended that there was a clear discrepancy with regard to alleged recovery of a mobile phone of the victim from the petitioner.
“In this case, it is to be noted that though there is a charge of causing death by strangulation, the finding is that the death was caused as a result of the injuries inflicted with the knife,” the bench noted in its verdict, adding that the knife was apparently carried and wielded by another co-accused.
“From him (one of the co-accused) in fact, the recovery of the knife was also effected which becomes all the more reason for us to conclude that it will be totally unsafe to convict the appellant of the charges of which he is found guilty including section 302 of the IPC based only on the recovery of the mobile phone where the recovery itself suffers from suspicion and doubt,” the bench said.
