Fabricated Or False Documents In Probe Will Invite Departmental Action: MP High Court Issues Stern Warning To Police
The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently set aside the life sentences of two individuals in a 2017 murder case from Panna District, observing that the chain of circumstantial evidence was incomplete and tainted by serious investigative lapses.
Further, the division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Rajendra Kumar Vani observed that the memorandum based on disclosure of the accused was a 'fictitious' document and thus issued a stern warning to police personnel.
The bench held,
"Copy of the judgment be supplied to Government Advocate who may request the Director General of Police to do the needful within his discretion and at least Director General of Police is requested to circulate this judgment amongst all police personnel that if any of the act of the police person is found to be fictitious on creation of forged documents then departmental enquiry can be initiated against them. This will be a warning to a police person to be careful while carrying out an investigation".
The appellants were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC by the First Additional Session Judge in Panna District for the alleged murder of Panthprakash Kushwaha. The appellants challenged the conviction on the ground that the chain of circumstantial evidence was incomplete and inconsistent.
The court noted that the prosecution's case was based on the testimony of one Ramzan Khan (PW 15) regarding the 'last seen' theory. However, it was observed that the witness later turned hostile and denied seeing the accused with the deceased on the date of the incident.
The bench further found discrepancies in the memorandums based on the disclosure of the accused. The court noted that Inspector DK Singh was present at the crime scene at 8:30 am, but the memorandum also records his presence in the police station, which is 4 kms away, at the same time.
The court held, "Thus, it is evident that memorandum is a fictitious document which was prepared subsequently to rope in the accused persons. Thus, it is submitted that chain of circumstances is not complete. The conviction has been made on the basis of surmises and conjectures".
Further, the bench, relying on the landmark case of 1984, Sharad BirdhiChand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116, reiterated that in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, the chain of evidence must be complete and must exclude every hypothesis except the guilt.
Accordingly, the bench held,
"We are of the opinion that chain of circumstances is not complete. There is no evidence of last seen, conviction at the behest of the police personnel who have conducted not only faulty investigation but malicious investigation as is evident from memorandums Exhibit P/16 and P/17 drawn by Inspector D.K. Singh so also the fact that memorandum were drawn as per the convenience of Investigating Officer, impugned judgment cannot be sustained in the eyes of law".
Case Title: Kamlesh Bai Kushwaha v State of MP