The Supreme Court has observed that non-explanation or false explanation of an accused to questions posed by Court u/s 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure can’t be used as a link to complete chain of circumstances/events.
Hon’ble Court further observed that such statement u/s 313 CrPC could be used as additional evidence if the prosecution has proved the chain of circumstances leads to no other conclusion than the accused’s guilt.
In the instant case. The Trial Court convicted the man for murdering his wife. On appeal, Bombay HC upheld the judgement of the Trial Court.
Before the Apex Court, the accused argued that the case rests only on circumstantial evidence, and the prosecution was unable to prove that the death was a homicide.
After going through evidence on record, the Supreme Court observed that there were no marks on the body to suggest struggle or violence, and even the medical expert had stated that it might be a case of suicide and as per the post-mortem report, cause of death was asphyxia due to hanging. Therefore, the Bench was unable to prove that the death was a homicide.
The Court further observed that Section 106 of the Evidence Act doesn’t directly operate against either wife or husband who lives under the same roof, being the last person seen with the deceased.
While referring to non-explanation or false explanation of an accused to questions posed by Court u/s 313 Cr.PC, the Court observed that as settled law, false explanation or non-explanation can only be used as additional evidence and cannot complete the chain. As per Kashi Ram judgement, the same can be used only as an additional link. Therefore, the prosecution has to establish the chain of events to prove the guilt of the accused.
The Court noted that the prosecution has failed to prove motive, and there was no incriminating evidence to prove the accused’s guilt.