Trial Court's Reliance On Weak & Coerced Evidence While Convicting Father For Murdering Son Is Legally Unsustainable: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has overturned the conviction of four accused persons, who were sentenced in the 2012 Awantipora murder case, citing inadmissibility of confessions, procedural lapses, and weak circumstantial evidence.The court expressed its surprise after noting that the FIR, giving initial information about the incident, was filed without any tangible evidence and even before the recovery of the dead body. The court added that the identity of the informant, on the basis of which the FIR was registered, was never revealed or examined, which raised substantial doubts about the prosecution's case.A bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Justice Rajesh Sekhri said that the prosecution witnesses in their evidence had revealed that it was numberdar of the village who had given information of murder committed by the appellants however, the numberdar in his evidence stated that that he heard a rumour that the deceased has been murdered and sent the Chowkidar to verify the veracity of the rumour. The statements, court said, raised doubts about the credibility of the initial information. The court added that giving of information before recovery of the deceased raises two presumptions First, that the informant was an important eyewitness who refused to come forward and Second, that the informant was himself an accused person, who implicated others to deflect attention from his own self.The court said that there was no positive evidence against the accused persons except for the confession. The court however said that several witnesses confirmed that the police detained family members of the accused and pressured the accused persons into making the confession. It said that the confessions were obtained under duress, making them unreliable and inadmissible.The court said that for a confession to be voluntary, it must be based on the informed consent of the accused persons, which means the court before which the confession is made must be satisfied that the accused has understood that he could be punished on the basis of his confession alone. Thus, the court said the confession must reflect informed consent on the part of its maker, fully conscious of the consequences of giving the confession.In regard to the discovery of the dead body based on disclosure, the court also noted that the location where the body was found was open to public and was already known to villagers before the accused allegedly disclosed it, making the police claim of the discovery of the body of the deceased at the instance of accused doubtful.The court said that discovery made under section 27 of the evidence act was only relevant to the extent of recovery of an artefact connected to the crime per se however; the court noted that the evidence on record reflects that there was no injury on the deceased that was caused by a Danda. Therefore, the Danda was not a weapon that could be connected to the offence and its seizure and presence of human blood was also suspicious.The court noted that with respect to the blood found on the artefacts which were recovered from the house of accused the witnesses stated that no blood sample of the accused was taken to rule out the possibility of the blood found on the artefacts as that being of the accused himself, as the objects were seized allegedly from the house of the accused persons. The court said if other possibilities are not ruled out, the benefit of doubt must go to the accused. It therefore reversed the conviction of the accused persons and directed their release forthwith. BACKGROUNDThe FIR was registered under Sections 302 (murder), 120-B (criminal conspiracy), and 201 IPC (causing disappearance of evidence) against the accused and other relatives for murdering the victim over a property dispute. The body of the deceased had not been recovered at the time of FIR registration, yet the accused were named in the FIR based on the anonymous tip-off. During the investigation, the police interrogated A1 (father of the deceased), who allegedly confessed to the crime and led the police to the location of the dead body in a dry well at in the orchard. An axe and wooden staff (Danda) were recovered at the instance of another accused (stepbrother of the deceased). The trial resulting in the conviction of A1 (father), A2 (stepbrother), and A3 (relative) under Sections 302, 120-B, and 201 IPC, while A4 (stepmother) was convicted under Section 201 IPC for helping dispose of the body however five other accused were acquitted of all charges.APPEARANCES.T. Hussain, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Nida Nazir, Adv. Mr. Rizwan-ul-Zaman, Adv. with Mr. Shafi Bhat, Adv. Advocate for petitionerMohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG with Mr. Taha Khalil, Assisting counsel for RespondentsCase-title: Mohammad Akram Wani & Ors. vs State Th. PS Awantipora, Citation: 2025, Livelaw, (JKL) 116Click Here To Read/Download Order

Trial Court's Reliance On Weak & Coerced Evidence While Convicting Father For Murdering Son Is Legally Unsustainable: J&K High Court

Aleem Syeed

Tags