Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai, Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, Sikkim High Court
Prosecution Proved Case Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Sikkim High Court Upholds Conviction Of Man Accused Of Killing His Grandmother By Slitting Throat
|The Sikkim High Court dismissed the Appeal of the accused grandson against the Judgment of the Sessions Judge, convicting him under Section 302 of the IPC.
The Sikkim High Court has upheld the conviction of a man who was accused of killing his 82-year-old grandmother by slitting her throat.
An Appeal was filed by the accused grandson against the Judgment of the Sessions Judge, convicting him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 500/-.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai and Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan held, “The above evidence augmented by the evidence of the Appellant that he had cut his grandmother with a knife and sought to surrender before the Police establishes that the Appellant had committed the offence. Even if we are to exclude the extra-judicial confession, though made entirely voluntarily by the Appellant to the Prosecution witnesses, the other evidence on record unequivocally establishes the fact that the Prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the Appellant for committing the murder of his grandmother.”
Advocate Kazi Sangay Thupden represented the Appellant/Accused while Additional Public Prosecutor Yadev Sharma represented the Respondent/State.
Brief Facts
The Appellant-accused then aged about 29 years, allegedly attacked the victim i.e., his grandmother, aged about 82 years, with a sharp object on her throat in the year 2022. She was evacuated to the Rangpo PHC by her relatives. The doctor informed the Station House Officer (SHO) that a lady had been brought dead to the PHC with her throat cut, which could possibly be homicidal. Thereafter, the SHO also received the information about the alleged assault.
Consequently, the Appellant was apprehended near the riverside and brought to the Rangpo PS with the help of other persons of the locality, including off duty India Reserve Battalion (IRBn) personnel, who were off duty and resided in the same colony as the deceased and the Appellant. The Trial Court concluded that the Appellant was responsible for the alleged murder. Accordingly, it convicted and sentenced him and being aggrieved by this, he was before the High Court.
Reasoning
The High Court in the above regard, observed, “In conclusion, it emerges that PW-2 admittedly failed to identify MO-4 as the blood sample of the Appellant. PW-17 although identified Exhibit ‘J’ as the two pieces of cotton gauze bearing the blood samples of the Appellant (Exhibit P-29/PW-17), but made no mention of Exhibit ‘J’ in his report, except that along with Exhibit ‘K’ it was subjected to DNA isolation. Thus, no positive identification of Exhibit ‘J’ was made by PW-17. The Prosecution thereby failed to prove that MO-4 or Exhibit ‘J’ are the blood samples of the Appellant.”
The Court noted that the scientist found that the blood stains on the wearing apparels of the Appellant, being MO-2 and MO-3 were of the deceased, having compared them with Exhibit ‘K’ (MO-8) blood sample identified to be that of the deceased by the scientist.
“PW-17 not only found the blood of the victim on the wearing apparels of the Appellant, but also on the surgical blade (MO-1). … The impugned Judgment and Order on Sentence are accordingly upheld”, it added.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal and upheld the conviction of the accused.
Cause Title- Navin alias Nar Bahadur Baraily v. State of Sikkim (Case Number: Crl.A. No.32 of 2024)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocate Kazi Sangay Thupden
Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor Yadev Sharma and Assistant Public Prosecutor Pema Bhutia.