Read Time: 06 minutes

While noting that excessive number of injuries will not lead to an inference about involvement of more than one person, the Top Court last week refused to set aside conviction of one Suresh Yadav, who got enraged when he saw the his girlfriend talking to another boy; and caused multiple injuries to her by a pointed knife, leading to her death.

"Excessive number of injuries do not ipso facto lead to an inference about involvement of more than one person; rather the nature of injuries and similarity of their size/dimension would only lead to the inference that she was mercilessly and repeatedly stabbed by the same weapon and by the same person...", held the top court.

Yadav was convicted of offences under Section 302 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, after having been tried in Sessions Case No. 05 of 2004 by the Court of Ninth Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Durg.

As per the post-mortem report, as many as 12 injuries were found over the body of the deceased, including penetrating wounds on lungs and liver.

Furthermore, an eye-witness, had asserted having seen Yadav repeatedly causing injuries on the person of the deceased. The prosecution further asserted that the weapon of offence, the knife of about 21 cm long blade, was recovered on the disclosure made by Yadav himself.

The Trial Court's conviction was upheld by the High Court.

Amicus Curiae appointed by the court, told a bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath that there had been no evidence of matching of the blood allegedly found on the knife with that of the deceased; and that the eye-witness could not be said to be a reliable witness, particularly when the incident allegedly happened in front of his house, but he neither raised any alarm nor tried to save the deceased; and that excessive number of injuries on the person of the deceased would suggest involvement of more than one person. 

The bench noted that the eye-witness to the incident, remained unimpeachable and had been believed by the two Courts.

"His evidence cannot be discarded only for the reason that he allegedly did not raise any alarm or did not try to intervene when the deceased was being ferociously assaulted and stabbed...", observed the bench.

With this view, the appeal came to be dismissed. 

Since, as per Office Report and the Custody Certificate placed before it, the court found that Yadav after having served the sentence of imprisonment for a period of 15 years 9 months and 27 days, was released under Section 432 CrPC by the Government of Chhattisgarh, the court clarified that dismissal of the appeal shall not be of any adverse effect on such exercise of power of remission by the Government of Chhattisgarh.

Case Title: SURESH YADAV @ GUDDU v. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH