NDLI: State Through C.b.i. Vs. Mahender Singh Dahiya

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Penal Code 1860: s.302 and s.201
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Penal Code, 1860: s.302 and s.201 - Diabolic murder--Strangulation to death and dismemberment and mutilation of body parts - Respondent an Indian orthopedic doctor got engaged with deceased and shifted to London to stay with - laws - Marriage took place subsequently - Honeymoon was arranged for 5 days - Respondent returned from trip after 2 days without deceased and stated that the deceased abandoned him - Thereafter he absconded and remained Underground until arrest - Body parts found in the rubbish bin and lake near the hotel where the couple stayed and identified to be that of deceased - Allegation against respondent that he strangulated his wife to death on the first night of honeymoon and thereafter dismembered and mutilated parts of her body and disposed them off. Trial court held that circumstances pointed out towards the guilt of the respondent and convicted him u/s.302 and s.201 - Acquittal by High Court on the ground that the prosecution failed to connect the respondent with the alleged murder - On appeal, held: Prosecution had miserably failed to connect the respondent with the alleged murder of his wife - Resentment of the respondent to the friendly behaviour of the deceased towards the other men would not be sufficient to hold that he had the necessary motive to kill the deceased - There was nothing to suggest that the deceased or her family members had apprehended any harm or threat to life of deceased at any stage till the couple left for the honeymoon - Given the previous attitude of the deceased, it was possible that she had walked out on her husband - Explanation given by respondent consistently from beginning was that the deceased had left him voluntarily - As regards the circumstances relating to the state of affairs that existed in the hotel room, the evidence of the hotel staff was inconsistent - Finger print expert was not able to connect the palm prints of body parts recovered with the palm prints of the deceased - The reports submitted by the doctors contained numerous discrepancies. That apart the identification marks given by the witnesses did not coincide with the reports and therefore, no reliance could be placed upon them for establishing the identity of these body parts as that of the deceased - Articles and clothes taken on trip by deceased not produced for identification by witnesses at the time of trial- There was no reliable evidence to indicate that the blood that was recovered from the bathroom of hotel room definitely belonged to the deceased - An adverse inference against the respondent cannot be drawn merely because he remained in hiding till he was arrested - Prosecution a/so did not produce any evidence with regard to the recovery of any weapon of offence. - Order of acquittal was justified.Criminal law: Motive - Held: In cases based on circumstantial evidence, motive for committing the crime assumes great importance - Absence of motive would put the court on its guard to scrutinize the evidence very closely to ensure that suspicion, emotion or conjecture do not take the place of proof - In a case where there is motive, it affords added support to the finding of the court that the accused was guilty for the offence charged with.Evidence: Suspicion no matter how strong cannot, and should not be permitted to take the place of proof- Therefore, courts are to ensure a cautious and balanced appraisal of the intrinsic value of the evidence produced in Court.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.S. Nijjar
Neutral Citation	2011 INSC 80
Petitioner	State Through C.b.i.
Respondent	Mahender Singh Dahiya
SCR	[2011] 1 S.C.R. 1104
Judgement Date	2011-01-28
Case Number	1360

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

State Through C.b.i. Vs. Mahender Singh Dahiya

Please Log-in to view this content

Jagroop Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Paramjit Singh@ Mithu Singh Vs. State of Punjab Through Secretary (home)

Mahavir Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Kirpal Singh Vs. State of U.p.

Ramesh Vs. State Through Inspector of Police

Prajeet Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar

Bhajju @ Karan Singh Vs. State of M.p.

Dilbagh Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Om Pal Singh Vs. State of U.p.

State Through C.b.i. Vs. Mahender Singh Dahiya

State Through C.b.i. Vs. Mahender Singh Dahiya

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Jagroop Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Paramjit Singh@ Mithu Singh Vs. State of Punjab Through Secretary (home)

Mahavir Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Kirpal Singh Vs. State of U.p.

Ramesh Vs. State Through Inspector of Police

Prajeet Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar

Bhajju @ Karan Singh Vs. State of M.p.

Dilbagh Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Om Pal Singh Vs. State of U.p.

State Through C.b.i. Vs. Mahender Singh Dahiya