Inconclusive Blood Groups and Doubtful Recoveries Breakdown the Chain of Circumstantial Evidence in Murder Trial

The Appellants were convicted by the Trial Court for the murder [Section 302/34 IPC], kidnapping [Section 364 IPC], and destruction of evidence [Section 201 IPC] of two victims, Rakesh and Amitchand

The prosecution alleged that following a series of altercations between Accused Nos. 1 & 2 and a shop owner (PW-24) on December 28–29, 2012, the accused intercepted the victims (employees of PW-24) on the night of December 30, assaulted them in a shop block (gala), and later slit their throats near a railway track.

The police discovered the bodies on December 31.

The conviction relied on circumstantial evidence: the accused’s blood-stained clothes, the recovery of the victims' mobile phones and weapons from Accused No. 1’s shop, and the recovery of a scooter at the instance of Accused No. 4.

The Appellants challenged the conviction, citing lack of motive and fabricated recovery evidence.

The court applied the settled law on circumstantial evidence, which requires that the chain of circumstances must be so complete as to leave no reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused.

Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, regarding the admissibility of information leading to discovery, noting that only the portion leading to a fact is admissible, and subsequent "recoveries" from open or accessible areas are weak evidence.

Section 34 of the IPC regarding common intention and relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The High Court found the Trial Court's reasoning relied on "conjectures and surmises".

The court noted a total lack of motive, as the prior quarrels involved PW-24, not the deceased victims.

The "recovery" of mobile phones from the accused’s shop was deemed "unbelievable" because the accused were in police custody when the shop was allegedly locked and the keys hidden; this was confirmed by CDR data showing an incoming call was received on a victim's phone at 7:19 a.m. while the accused was already in custody.

The blood-stained clothes were not incriminating because the accused had sustained their own bleeding injuries in a previous documented fight (NCs filed), and the CA report failed to determine the blood group.

The court criticized the Trial Court for improperly relying on the inadmissible confessional portions of Section 27 statements.

The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment dated August 8, 2023, and all Appellants were acquitted of all charges with orders for release and execution of P.R. bonds under Section 481 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.