Jag Prasad vs State (Nct Of Delhi)

$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

rd
RESERVED ON: 23 September, 2026.
th
DATE OF DECISION: 28 October, 2026.
th
UPLOADED ON : 29 October, 2026.
# CNR No. DLHC010581872024
+ CRL.A. 837/2024 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 73/2026
JAG PRASAD .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, Mr. Prasanna,
Mr. Ajay Kumar, Ms. Avantika
Shankar, Mr. Mehul Gupta, Mr. Yash
Arora, Mr. Naval Goel, Mr. Sarthak
Gupta, Ms. Amrita Kumari, Ms.
Nivedita Tiwari, Ms. Isha Singh & Mr.
Pradeep Yadav, Advs. (M:
9810066150)
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP with
Mr. Lalit Luthra & Mr. Rajender Pal,
Advs. for State (M: 9910645959)
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE DINESH BHATT

JUDGMENT

DINESH BHATT, J.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
rd
2. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 3 June,
st
2024 and the order on sentence dated 31 July, 2024.
3. The Appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal
Code, 1908 ( hereinafter called as IPC ) and has been sentenced in the
following terms:-
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 1 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

“Keeping in view the above-mentioned facts and
circumstances, the convict Jag Prasad is hereby
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life
and to pay a fine Rs. 10,000/- for offence punishable
u/s 302 of IPC. In default of payment of fine amount,
the convict shall undergo further simple
imprisonment for a period of three months. The
benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. shall also be
conferred upon the convict. Fine not deposited on
behalf of convict.

In view of inadequate capacity of convict, it is hereby
recommended that compensation be provided to the
parents of deceased and children of deceased out of
the Victim Compensation Fund by the Office of
DLSA, North-east, KKD, Delhi. Out of the entire fine
amount, Rs. 5,000/- shall be given to the LRs of
deceased i.e. children of deceased namely Master
Yash, aged 9 years and Master Raj, aged 10 years
as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- shall be given to the
State, as and when same is deposited.”

nd
4. As per the record, the incident occurred on 02 October, 2016 when
DD No. 26D (DP 209) was recorded that the victim lady of 24 years of age
had hanged herself ( faansi laga li hai ). At the relevant point of time, the
statements of the brother, father and mother of the victim were recorded by
the Ld. SDM. None of the family members of the deceased raised any
complaint that any demand of dowry was being made from them. In fact, the
statement of all family members was that the marriage was a happy marriage
with the Appellant.
5. After medical examination of the deceased, post-mortem was carried
out, where it was reported that the cause of death of deceased was ligature
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 2 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

strangulation and not hanging. Thus, the case which was initially reported as
a suicide, after obtaining the post-mortem report, was converted and
registered under Section 302 IPC. The accused was arrested and further
investigation was carried out. Prosecution thereafter sought subsequent
opinion regarding the ligature material which was found on the spot which
accused had disclosed was used by the deceased for hanging herself. The
expert (doctor) opined that the injuries found on the neck of the deceased were
possible by the said ligature material, i.e. saree produced by investigator for
opinion. On further investigation accused in his disclosure statement had
mentioned that on the day and time of the incident in question when he had
returned for his lunch he found his wife with another man in an objectionable
situation and on seeing him, the other man ran away. He was angry and, in his
anger, he hit deceased’s head on the wall which rendered her unconscious, he
thereafter strangulated her with a nylon rope and threw the rope in a drain.
Thereafter, he made it appear like a hanging case and that he had cut the
hanging material ( saree ) and brought down the deceased and thereafter
informed the police. In consequence of the disclosure, police stated that they
tried to search for the said nylon rope but the same could not be recovered.
Further investigation was carried out and after completion of the investigation
charge sheet was filed. The case was thereafter committed and was tried
before the Court of Additional Session Judge, where charge under Section
302 IPC was framed, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
6. The prosecution examined 28 witnesses. The statement of the accused
was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C/ Section 351 BNSS wherein he stated
that he was shocked and shattered upon finding his wife hanging from the
ceiling fan he cut the saree and took her down and maintained that the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 3 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

deceased has committed suicide. He denied the allegations of having
murdered his wife and asserted that the present case was one of suicide.
However, the accused did not lead any evidence in his defence. Upon
appreciation of the evidence on record, the Ld. Trial Court came to a
conclusion that the Accused/Appellant was guilty of murder of his wife
(deceased).
7. Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, ld. counsel appearing for the Appellant/accused
has relied upon Ex. PW1/C and PW3/C (DP-347) to show that there was no
demand of dowry. In fact, the Appellant was working on the said date and had
gone home from his place of work to have lunch when he noticed that his wife
had committed suicide and he had immediately called his employer around
1:30 pm itself. The summary of the incident is recorded in DP 349 and DP
447. Various witnesses who had appeared including the brother PW1 who
does not make any such allegation of mental harassment or dowry demand.
PW7 and PW11, the two employers, i.e., PW7 Shri Shiva Kant Pandey states
clearly that the Appellant had gone for lunch around 1:00 pm and had not
returned. PW11 states that the Appellant had made a call at 1:32 pm that his
wife has committed suicide. The neighbours PW13, PW14 and PW16, in fact,
did not support the case of the prosecution. It is his submission that the, post-
mortem report also states clearly that the death was due to Asphyxia caused
by strangulation, however, the doctor has not given any opinion as to whether
this is a case of suicide or homicide.
8. Reliance is also placed upon the testimony of PW6, who is the IO who
reached at the spot DP-253 and he states that he saw the lady hanging from
the ceiling fan and she was brought down. Jag Prasad also states that he had
seen the victim hanging from the fan.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 4 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

9. It is his submission that the evidence in the present case does not
support the case for conviction as there is no demand of dowry. The Appellant
and the victim were blessed with two children who were two years and one
st
year of age. The date of marriage being 21 May, 2011 and within a period of
five years, the death took place.
10. Considering the age of the children and the fact that all the family
members of the victim had made initially a statement that no demand of dowry
existed, there was no motive for the Appellant to cause the death of his wife.
11. Mr. Bahri, ld. Counsel for Respondent on the other hand has relied upon
the testimony of PW7, 10, 11, 16, 24, 26 and 27. According to him, the
admitted facts are that the Appellant has misled the police. He made a call to
Mr. Ajay Mishra, PW11, at 1:30 pm but he, thereafter, made the call to the
police only for the first time almost one hour later which shows his unnatural
conduct. Mr. Bahri, ld. Counsel has argued that in the statement under Section
313, various facts have been admitted by the Appellant who is the accused
and hence these facts need not be proved by the prosecution.
12. Reliance is placed upon the following questions put to the Appellant
under Section 313. Questions 1, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 31, 35, 42, 44, 54, 73. In
all these answers, the facts that have emerged is that the Appellant was living
with his wife in the same premises. He initially in answer to question No.3,
states that the PW6 had found the deceased hanging. Whereas in answer to
question 35 he states that the body was lying on the floor. These are
contradictory stands taken by the appellant. In answer to question 74, he
alleges that the mother-in-law had sought rupees 10 lakhs after the death of
the victim and due to non-payment of the same, he has been falsely
implicated.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 5 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

13. Mr. Bahri, Ld. Counsel relies upon the post-mortem report Ex. PW-
24/A to argue that the death is through strangulation. The height and weight
of the victim is relied upon to argue that no dent has been caused on the fan,
if she had hung herself, there ought to have been some dent on the fan. The
crime scene itself would show that there is no possibility of the victim having
hung herself using a stool considering the location of the fan and the height
of the room as also the height and weight of the victim. PW10, the mother has
given the motive that the Appellant has had an extramarital affair. The
Appellant has misrepresented to the police repeatedly. In the subsequent
opinion which was sought, there was a possibility of death due to two pieces
of the saree , however, it is still not clear that it is not due to strangulation.
When a post-mortem report says strangulation on the basis of the
circumstantial evidence, it ought to be clearly inferred that the appellant is
guilty. Trial Court judgment paragraphs 18, 19, 23 are relied upon to show
the analysis made by the trial court to establish the guilt of the accused.
14. In rejoinder submissions, Mr. Singhal, ld. Counsel submits that the
subsequent opinion which has been sought clearly shows that there was
possibility of death by hanging. The seizure memo PW-23/P1 and the seizure
memo of the saree pieces and the steel drum Ex.PW-23/E shows the relevant
evidence. Finally, it is concluded by Mr. Singhal that there is no injury on the
victim. Even the nail clippings which were taken, there is no DNA matching
with the appellant (Report Ex.PW-23/C). Thus, there is lack of any forensic
evidence to show that the appellant was guilty.
15. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant had vehemently argued that the case in
question was a case of suicide but was wrongly converted into a case of
murder. He had also stated that there were police witnesses i.e., PW6 and
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 6 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

PW11, who had themselves mentioned that they had seen one lady hanging
from the ceiling fan, she was taken down after cutting the printed chuni , he
had inspected the dead body, prior to cutting of chuni and photographer had
taken 12 photographs.
16. This argument however does not seem to be substantiated from the
record and seems to be inadvertent factual mistake made by the witnesses
PW6 and PW11. This is clear from the statement of other witnesses and
documents filed on record. This witness i.e. PW6 was accompanied by the
photographer PW9, who had mentioned that he along with the crime team and
SI Jagbir Singh PW6 had reached the spot, where SI Abodh (PW 27) along
with other police officials were present at the spot, they had noticed one
female dead body lying on the floor of the room, two parts of chuni were also
lying near the dead body, one pair of scissors was also lying, on instructions,
he had he had taken 12 photographs of the dead body and the room where
dead body and household articles were lying. He identified the 11
photographs, ex. PW9/A1 to ex.PW 9/A11 of the spot and clarified that the
12th photograph was not related to the incident in question. The said 11
photographs are clear which show that the dead body and other articles were
lying on the floor, there is no photograph showing the body hanging from the
fan. Other witnesses who had reached prior to PW6 is PW27 SI Abodh
Sharma, who categorically mentioned that after the information was received
through phone and recorded as DD, Ex. PW 5/A it was assigned to him by the
duty officer to take action in the matter, he had gone to the spot along with
constable Pawan and found one female dead body was lying on the floor, PCR
officials were also present, husband (accused) of deceased was also present
on this spot who had made call at 100 number and the caller had told that his
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 7 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

wife had committed suicide and he had taken her body down from the fan. He
informed about the incident to senior police officers as well as crime team and
thereafter PW6 along with photographer PW9 had come to the spot. This fact
is further corroborated from the Delhi police control room report wherein the
caller on 2nd October, 2016 at 14:32:13, had informed that his wife had
committed suicide.
The said report reads as under:-

“ 02/10/2016 14:56:36 RCD MNT ---- KIRAN W/O
JAG PRASAD AGE 24 YRS R/O H. NO. 5, GALI NO. 4
SHAHID BHAGAT SINGH COLONY NE SAARI FAN
SE BAANDHKAR FANSHI LAGAI HAI’ GHARWALO
NE NEECHE UTAAR RAKHI HAI. PATI MAUKE PAR
HAI. FAANSI LAGANE KA KOI KARAN NAHI BATA
RAHA HAI. KOI SUICIDE NOTE NAHI MILA HAI.
GHAR PAR DO BACHCHE AUR LADY AKELI THI
PATI KAAM PAR GAYA THA. JO KARIB 12:45 HRS
PAR AAKER DEKHA LADY FAN SE LATKI MILI THI.
ISNE LADY KO NEECHE UTAR LIYA THA. MAUKE
PAR DEAD HAI. WLP 02/10/2016 16:05:22 SI ABODH
PS KARAWAL NAGAR”

17. This report was also entered as DD no. 26B/ Ex 5/A. In any case, it is
also not the defence of the accused that he had not removed the body from the
fan. In fact, his defence right from the beginning and reiterated in answers to
question nos. 21 of his statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C/ 351 BNSS was,
as under:

“ ………… In fact, my wife was hanging from the ceiling fan and as soon
as I found her, I cut the saree with the help of the scissor and brought
her body down and then informed people around me.”

18. There thus appears to be no doubt that in fact accused was the first
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 8 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

person who had seen the deceased and had reported that he had found her
hanging from the ceiling fan and he had taken down the body himself and
only thereafter informed the police. It is also not disputed that the accused had
gone for his work at about 6:00 am in the morning and had returned to his
house during lunch hour at about 1:00 pm where he states that he found the
deceased hanging from the ceiling fan and had committed suicide. It is also
an admitted case that he had informed the police on 100 about alleged the
alleged suicide committed by his wife, though prosecution has also taken his
voice samples and also corroborated about his voice but this fact was never
disputed by the accused and his consistent stand is that he had himself first
informed the police about the suicide of his wife.
19. There was however a twist in the investigation of the case after the post-
mortem report Ex. PW24/A was received wherein the doctor had opined that
the injuries which showed horizontal ligature marks on the neck, seemed to
be more consistent with case of strangulation and he had specifically
mentioned the cause of death to be ligature strangulation. This witness PW24
was not cross examined on the issue of cause of death by asphyxia as a result
of ante mortem ligature strangulation. In cross examination by the ld. Counsel
for the Accused/Appellant, this witness further clarified that he had found
internal injuries over brain and scalp tissue and those injuries were ante
mortem recent injuries that is within 12 to 24 hours and no mark of struggle
or assault was noticed over the body.
20. The Ld. Trial Court has also elaborately dealt on this issue and has
noted in great detail in paragraph 28 quoting texts from Modi’s medical
th
jurisprudence 25 Edition, about the differences between hanging and
strangulation and as given by the Supreme Court in Javed Abdul Rajjaq
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 9 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra (2019) 10 SCC 778 .

“ 28. The differences between hanging and
strangulation have been highlighted by Modi on
th
Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, 25 Edn., as
follows:”

Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 10 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

21. The ld. Trial court in paragraph 12 of the impugned judgment has made
reference to the post-mortem report Ex. PW24/A of the deceased, as provided
under: -
“….. seen in the light of the above-said literature
contained in Modi's Medical Jurisprudence as
discussed in the above judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, following characteristics of death due to
strangulation are mentioned in the post-mortem report
Ex. PW24/A and they clearly point towards the fact that
the cause of death in the present case was ligature
strangulation and not hanging (i.e. it was not a case of
suicide by hanging as claimed by accused).
In the said report Ex. PW 24/A:-

1. There is no mention of dribbling of saliva.
2. As per the general observation noted in the PM report,
the face of the deceased was congested and there is
subconjunctival hemorrhage in both eyes.
3. The ligature mark was complete and horizontal around
the neck over thyroid cartilage.
4. There is no finding of stretching of neck, which is must
in the case of suicide by hanging. Rather, it is reported
that there was injury to the muscles of neck in the form
of bruising of bilateral carotid sheath and neck muscles
present with extravasation in surrounding tissues.
5. Apart from the ligature mark, injury on the scalp is also
reported in the form of extravasation over bilateral
occipital and right parietal region.”

22. Further reference to the post-mortem report is important wherein
injuries on the neck have been mentioned.

General observations and details of external injuries.

“(A) General observation: Dead body of an adult
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 11 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

female wrapped in white plastic cover and mearing
black blouse, cream saree with the multicolour prints
and light blue colour petty coat. Eyes closed, mouth
partially open. Red sacred thread around neck. Red
beaded mala around neck. Face congested.
subconjunctival hemorrhage in both eyes. Rigor mortise
passed off. Marbling over both arms anteriorly and
front of chest. Greenish discolouration over body at
places. Ligature material not present around neck.

(B) Details of External injuries
Reddish abraded ligature mark is present completely
and horizontally around neck over thyroid cartilage. In
midline ligature mark is 1.0 cm wide and 6.2 cm below
chin. Mark goes horizontally backwards on right side
and is 1.0 cm wide and 4.8 cm below right angle of
mandible. Mark goes further backwards horizontally
and is 1.0cm wide and 6.0 cm below mastoid. Further
posteriorly mark is 1.0cm wide and 8.0cm below
occipital protuberance over midline back of neck. Mark
goes horizontally forwards on left side and is 1.2 cm
wide and 5.5cm below left mastoid. Mark goes forwards
and is 0.8 wide and 4.7 cm below left angle of mandible
and further meets in midline neck circumference is 33.0
cm.

(C) Internal examination of Head and Neck
Scalp: Extravasation over bilateral occipital and
right parietal region.
Skull: NAD 1210 gm, congested
Brain: Subarachnoid hemorrhage over bilateral
occipital region.
Neck: Bruising of bilateral carotid sheath and neck
muscles present with extravasation in surrounding
tissues.”


23. The injuries clearly show that the ligature marks were going
horizontally backwards, were complete and not vertical. It was well-defined
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 12 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

and slightly depressed mark corresponding roughly to the breadth of the
ligature, situated low down in the neck below the thyroid cartilage and
encircling the neck horizontally and completely. The same is in contrast to
ligature mark of hanging which would normally be incomplete and present
higher on the neck. The report assumes greater importance as the opinion
given by the doctor was not challenged by the accused and no question on this
being either a wrong opinion or possibility of similar injuries in hanging have
been put to the witness. In light of this, there is no infirmity in the finding of
the Ld. Trial Court that the case in question was a case of strangulation and
not hanging.
24. Learned counsel for the Appellant argued that even if it is presumed
that that the present case was of strangulation and not hanging, there is no
opinion of the expert (doctor) as to whether the said death was a homicide or
a suicide. For this purpose, Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology
th
25 Edition ( Supra ) defines “ strangulation as the compression of the neck by
a force other than hanging. Weight of the body has nothing to do with
strangulation ”. “ Ligature strangulation is a violent form of death, which
results from constricting the neck by means of a ligature or by any other
means without suspending the body .” It is also mentioned that if the windpipe
is compressed so suddenly as to occlude the passage of air altogether, the
individual is rendered powerless to call for assistance, becomes insensible,
and may die instantly. It is also medically well recognized that voluntary
strangulation is very rare as if the body is made to struggle for air using
voluntary power, reflex action immediately starts and it is difficult for the
individual to continue with the said process of strangulation by oneself.
Therefore, hanging or other processes which once started proceed further
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 13 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

involuntarily are mostly found in cases of suicide.
25. The injuries which were found as external injuries mentioned in the
post-mortem report and the internal injuries show that the ligature mark was
about 1.0 cm wide from the front as well as from left and right side of the
neck and extending almost completely on the back but ligature mark was
about 1.2 cm wide below the left mastoid and while going forward was 0.8
cm. wide below left angle of mandible which shows that the major pressure
of the ligature mark was on the front side. This gives an inference that the
strangulation was probably done from the left back side of the neck. This also
gives a strong suggestion of presence and involvement of a second person at
the spot. The next important fact which is required to be appreciated in the
present case is that since there is no eyewitness and accused was the first
person who had seen the dead body. It was for the said first person to have
explained truly the said circumstances in which he found the deceased.
However, accused’s statement given to the police was that when he returned
to his home at lunch time around 1.00pm he found his wife hanging from the
fan. He immediately cut the saree and brought her down. He removed the
saree from the fan and thereafter informed his employer and also informed
the police on 100 number. But as per the prosecution, accused had given a
false version of deceased having committed suicide by hanging. This fact of
accused having made a false statement is corroborated from the medical
evidence which shows the cause of death to be ligature strangulation and not
hanging. There is also no evidence on record to show that except the accused
anybody else had actually seen the deceased in hanging condition at the spot.
It has also been noted by the Ld. Trial Court that the ceiling fan did not show
any signs of either the blades being twisted or the fan being damaged in any
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 14 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

manner, particularly, in view of the fact that the deceased was stated to be 162
centimetres in height and 68 kgs in weight. If a body of such stature and
weight was suspended from the fan, it would almost be impossible that there
would not have been any damage to either the blades or the ceiling fan. The
photographs in question placed on record Ex. PW9/A1 to A11 also show that
the fan is seen to be completely okay and no damage or twisting in any form
is visible. It was also the initial stand of the accused that a stool and a drum
which had been kept there had been used for hanging but the photographs
show that these two items had been kept at different places and did not seem
to have been disturbed. In any case, the mere fact of absence of any damage
to the fan is one of very important circumstances to show that the story of
hanging from the said ceiling fan as narrated by the Accused/Appellant could
be suspicious story. In these circumstances where the circumstantial evidence
assumes prime importance, it was for the accused person to have explained
truthfully the said circumstances in which he found the deceased but he failed
to do so and the Ld. Trial Court had rightly concluded that Section 106 of the
Evidence Act, 1872 was applicable in the case.

26. Coming to one another important fact disclosed by the accused which
does give a probable explanation about the incident in question. It is the case
of the prosecution that after the I.O. had found that the accused had been
misleading the prosecution and had raised a false story of suicide by his wife,
he was arrested and he had made a disclosure statement wherein he mentioned
that he had found his wife with some other male person in objectionable
circumstances and on seeing him he had fled away. In the rage of anger, he
had hit the head of the deceased on the wall and she had become unconscious
and thereafter he had strangulated her with a nylon rope and he had thrown
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 15 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

the nylon rope in the drain nala . Nothing was recovered in pursuance to the
said disclosure statement but the prosecution has tried to rely on the same, to
point out that the same was disclosing a motive for committing the offence in
question. The said disclosure statement for the purpose of the recovery made
on disclosure is inconsequential as no recovery was affected, however, it still
can be considered as disclosure of an additional fact wherein it was mentioned
by the accused that he had hit the head of the deceased against a wall and
thereafter she was rendered unconscious.
27. This fact assumes greater importance as the body of deceased did not
show any struggle marks or external injuries on her body and in fact even the
nail clippings did not show any incriminating material. When the said fact is
analysed in the backdrop of the accused’s disclosure statement, there appears
to be a probable explanation as to why there is absence of any struggle marks
on the deceased’s body. Thus, if the deceased became unconscious after her
head was hit against a wall, there is a strong possibility that before the
deceased regained consciousness, accused had strangulated her. PW24, in
cross-examination mentioned that there were internal injuries over brain and
scalp tissue and those injuries were ante-mortem injuries caused within 12 to
24 hours. The details of the internal examination of the head and neck as given
in post mortem report Ex. PW4/A show that in the brain there was
Subarachnoid hemorrhage over bilateral occipital region while on the scalp ,
extravasation over bilateral occipital and right parietal region was noticed.
This would mean that the lower back portion of the head was injured prior to
her death almost matching with the time of reporting the death of deceased by
her husband. Thus, the above said disclosure statement corroborated by post-
mortem report of internal head injuries does explain the manner in which the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 16 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

deceased might have received internal injuries on her head.
28. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant has also raised an issue that the
witnesses, namely mother and father of the deceased had made material
improvements stating that accused had been demanding dowry. This fact of
the demand of dowry disclosed by mother and sister of deceased in her later
statement seems to be an afterthought and are clear improvements,
particularly, in view of the fact that the statement of mother and brother was
recorded by the SDM, i.e., Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW3/A and in these statements
none of the witnesses have mentioned about any dowry demand by the
accused. In fact, they mentioned that the accused and deceased’s married life
was happy. The witness PW1 Vashishth Mishra, brother of the deceased is
also clear to the extent that he did not support the prosecution case on the issue
of any dowry demand and he had in fact mentioned that he had stayed with
the accused and deceased for some period of time and did not find that there
was any dispute between them and in fact they were residing happily with
each other and their children. The mother of the deceased PW10 in a
subsequent statement before the Court had mentioned about the dowry
demand. But in cross examination clearly mentioned that she had never filed
any complaint regarding the such demand against the accused at any point of
time. The subsequent statement of the dowry demand by the accused seems
to be a clear improvement by the mother and sister of the deceased. Ld.
Counsel for the Appellant contends that in absence of motive by the accused,
prosecution case must fail. However, the motive by the accused for
committing the crime is not absolutely essential and the Ld. Trial Court had
dealt with this issue in the judgment citing the judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Amitava Banerjee vs. State of W.B., (2011) 12 SCC 554,
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 17 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

which reads as under:

“21. In Amitava Banerjee vs. State of W.B., (2011) 12
SCC 554, it was observed as under:

"41. Motive for the commission of an offence no doubt
assumes greater importance in cases resting on
circumstantial evidence than those in which direct
evidence regarding commission of the offence is
available. And yet failure to prove motive in cases
resting on circumstantial evidence is not fatal by itself.
All that the absence of motive for the commission of the
offence results in is that the court shall have to be more
careful and circumspect in scrutinizing the evidence to
ensure that suspicion does not take the place of proof
while finding the accused guilty.

42. Absence of motive in a case depending entirely on
circumstantial evidence is a factor that shall no doubt
weigh in favour of the accused, but what the Courts need
to remember is that motive is a matter which is primarily
known to the accused and which the prosecution may at
times find difficult to explain or establish by substantive
evidence.

43. Human nature being what it is, it is often difficult to
fathom the real motivation behind the commission of a
crime. And yet experience about human nature, human
conduct and the frailties of human mind has shown that
inducements to crime have veered around to what Wills
has in his book "Circumstantial Evidence" said:

"The common inducements to crime are the desires of
revenging some real or fancied wrong; of getting rid of
rival or an obnoxious connection; of escaping from the
pressure of pecuniary or other obligation or burden of
obtaining plunder or other coveted object, or preserving
reputation, either that of general character or the
conventional reputation or profession or sex or,
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 18 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28

gratifying some other selfish or malignant passion."

In Tarsem Kumar Vs. Delhi Administration, 1995
Cri.L.J.470, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had repeatedly
pointed out that where the case of prosecution has been
proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of
material produced before the Court, motive losses its
importance but in a case which is based on
circumstantial evidence, motive for committing the
crime on the part of the accused assumes greater
importance. It was further emphasised that if each of the
circumstances, proved on behalf of prosecution is
accepted by the Court for the purpose of recording a
finding that it was the accused who committed the crime
in question even in absence of any proof of a motive for
commission of such crime, the accused can be
convicted.”

29. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there does not appear to be
any infirmity in the judgment of the Ld. Trial Court, the appeal is accordingly
rd
dismissed. The conviction vide judgment dated 03 June, 2024 and the
st
sentence awarded vide order on sentence dated 31 July, 2024 is upheld.



DINESH BHATT
JUDGE


PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
OCTOBER 28, 2026
SS/RS/Jayant
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 837/2024 Page 19 of 19

Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:29.10.2026 11:28