PRADEEP Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Suspicion howsoever grave cannot be treated as proof and to base a conviction for offence under Section 302 and 201 IPC the prosecution is required to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused not only committed murder of the deceased but also caused disappearance of the evidence of crime. This onus of the prosecution can be discharged either by leading direct evidence or circumstantial evidence. However, in the present case the learned Trial Court failed to notice that neither by direct evidence nor circumstantial, the prosecution has been able to prove that Pradeep committed murder of his wife and caused disappearance of the evidence of offence.

(2.) The evidence against Pradeep on the basis of which impugned judgment dated September 09, 2011 convicting him for offences punishable under Section 302 IPC and 201 IPC has been passed is that he cremated the dead body of his wife without informing his in-laws and only 8 to 10 people joined him in the cremation of his wife.

(3.) Process of law was set into motion on receipt of PCR call which was recorded vide DD No.47B at 2.35 PM on August 14, 2010 at PS Dwarka North on an information sent by the brother of the deceased stating that his sister has been burnt after her husband murdered her at night and the husband is saying that she was unwell. The SDM Rajeev Shukla PW-10 was called at the spot, since the information related a lady having been died and cremated by her husband in suspicious circumstances within 7 years of her marriage. Statements of Manoj Kumar PW-3 brother of the deceased, Ram Chander PW-12 cousin of the deceased and Gaya Nand, a relation of the deceased were recorded by Rajeev Shukla.