BERNARD LYNGDOH PHAWA Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) An enquiry, commenced with a missing person complaint, led, to the arrest of the appellants, discovery of the body; exhumed from a graveyard, recovery of a rope; allegedly used to strangulate the victim, allegation of ransom calls received and recovery of material possessions of the victim from the house of one of the accused and a mobile phone from a witness. These coupled with the last seen theory; as purportedly stated by the witnesses, resulted in the prosecution being lodged before the Trial Court. The Trial Court after examining the evidence found it to be not sufficient to enter a finding of guilt, resulting in the acquittal of the accused. The High Court on an appeal by the State found that the five golden principles as enunciated in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC 116 adequately satisfied, bringing forth a conclusion only of a hypothesis of guilt excluding all possible hypothesis of innocence. There is no weak link, and the chain of circumstances is complete was the finding of the High Court. The High Court reversed the judgment of the Trial Court but found no kidnapping as charged, all the same finding the accused guilty of murder (Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) and causing disappearance of evidence (Sec. 201 of the IPC).

(3.) We are, in the above appeals, confronted with the divergence of opinion as expressed by the Trial Court and the High Court respectively. We heard Sh. Subhro Sanyal, Advocate-on-Record and Sh.Ajay Sabharwal, Advocate appearing for the two appellants and Sh. Avijit Mani Tripathi, Advocate-on-Record appearing for the State.