On December 19, a division bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur comprised of Justices Sujoy Paul and Prakash Chandra Gupta exonerated a murder suspect on the grounds that the prosecution's version of events did not match the site map created by the police, more than 12 years after the trial court's ruling. The division bench also stated that the suspension, no matter how substantial, cannot be used as evidence.

"So far ocular evidence of Gopal Prasad (PW-1) and Shanti Bai (PW- 2) is concerned wherein they deposed that appellant fled away from the room where his wife was found dead, it is apposite to note that it is nobody's case that they were present at the time of commission of crime and they had seen the appellant fleeing away from the scene of crime. In this backdrop, the prosecution must have produce some evidence to corroborate their oral evidence. In absence thereof and in view of defective 'site map', we are unable to hold that factum of escaping from scene of crime by appellant is satisfactorily established by the prosecution. The prosecution, no doubt, could establish its case that cause of death of Sangeeta is rupture of trachea and not the burn injuries. However, unless it is established with accuracy and precision that it was appellant, who has committed the said murder. Appellant cannot be held guilty merely on the basis of suspicion. It is trite that suspicion however, strong it may be, cannot take the place of proof."

Manoj, the appellant, was found guilty of killing his wife Sangeeta in July 2010. According to the prosecution's version of events, after midnight on the day of the incident in 2008, Manoj informed Sangeeta's uncle Balram that she had "lit herself ablaze." When Balram eventually arrived at Manoj's home, he discovered that the door was locked from the inside. Sangeeta was discovered dead after they forced open the door.

According to the medical report, tracheal rupture, not burn injuries, was the reason for the death. As a result, Manoj was the subject of a FIR for violations of Sections 302 and 304-B of the IPC. The trial judge found him guilty under Section 302 of the IPC but cleared him of the offence under Section 304-B. Angered, the appellant decided to appeal his conviction to the court.

"All these witnesses candidly deposed that said door was broken with the help of a sabbal and door was lying on the courtyard of the house when spot map was prepared," said the bench.

It also took notice of the police's site map, which showed that the only way out of the chamber was through the door, which was shut from the inside.

"There is no iota of indication in the 'site map' that any wall of the room where deceased was found was a kachcha wall or its bricks were removed in order to make a place for fleeing. Thus, apart from oral statement of Gopal Prasad (PW-1) and Shanti Bai (PW-2) and uncle (PW-4), there is no other material to substantiate that appellant fled away from the room after murdering the deceased by removing the bricks," said the court.

The court determined that the prosecution had not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt after making the aforementioned observations. As a result, the appeal was accepted, and the Appellant's conviction was overturned.

Case Title: MANOJ ALIAS GUDDU VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1622 OF 2010
Link: https://mphc.gov.in/upload/jabalpur/MPHCJB/2010/CRA/1622/CRA_1622_2010_FinalOrder_19-Dec-2022.pdf