TITLE: KALINGA @ KUSHAL V. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE INSPECTOR HUBLI
CITATION: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 622 OF 2013
DECIDED ON: 20 FEBRUARY 2024
CORAM: JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI AND JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma states that “High Court has erred in reversing the decision of acquittal. The evidence of the prosecution, at best, makes out a case for suspicion, and not for conviction. Accordingly, the impugned order and judgment are set aside. We find no infirmity in the order of the Trial Court and the same stands restored. Consequently, the appellant is acquitted from all the charges levelled upon him. The appellant is directed to be released forthwith, if lying in custody”.
Brief Facts:
In Karnataka, a heartbreaking incident unfolded when 2.5-year-old Hrithik went missing and was later discovered dead in a well. The accused, Hrithik’s uncle, faced charges related to the crime. Initially, the Trial Court acquitted the uncle based on discrepancies in witness testimonies and circumstantial evidence. However, the High Court later overturned this decision, relying on the appellant’s voluntary extra-judicial confession and the recovery of the deceased’s body.
Court’s Observation and Analysis:
The tragic case that unfolded in Karnataka, the appellant, the uncle of the deceased 2.5-year-old Hrithik, found himself at the center of a legal battle. The child had gone missing and was later discovered dead in a well. The Trial Court initially acquitted the appellant, citing discrepancies in witness testimonies and circumstantial evidence. However, the High Court later reversed this decision, basing its judgment on the voluntary extra-judicial confession made by the accused and the recovery of the child’s body.
The credibility of the appellant’s confession became a pivotal point of discussion during the court analysis. The High Court, while acknowledging minor discrepancies in witness testimonies, leaned on the strength of the confession, supported by corroborative evidence presented by the State. However, doubts were cast upon the confession’s reliability, as well as the consistency of the appellant’s statements, the circumstances of his arrest, and the recovery process of the deceased’s body.
The court emphasized the need for caution and corroboration when considering extra-judicial confessions. It delved into the intricacies of the case, noting various versions and inconsistencies in witness testimonies. The High Court’s decision to overturn the Trial Court’s acquittal was criticized for lacking evidence of perversity or illegality in the original judgment.
Ultimately, the judgment turned on the acceptance of evidence. In light of doubts raised regarding the confession and the overall case presented by the prosecution, the court concluded that the evidence failed to meet the necessary standards for acceptability. The restoration of the Trial Court’s decision led to the appellant’s acquittal, underscoring the importance of ensuring a strong and reliable evidentiary foundation, particularly in cases relying heavily on circumstantial evidence and confessions.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Komal Goswami
