Strong circumstantial proof enough for conviction: SC

New Delhi, Aug 25 (UNI) In an important ruling widening the scope of conviction in a murder case, the Supreme Court has held that the recovery of the body of a victim is not necessary for the conviction of the accused if strong circumstantial evidence is there.

The ruling was handed down by the court while upholding the judgment of the Patna High Court, convicting 14 people for murdering one Baijnath Singh on August 21, 1980.

The accused belong to one family who forcibly kidnapped two people, including the deceased, in a boat and after taking them in the middle of the river they began assualting the victims. One of them, however, managed to escape but an FIR could not be lodged on the same day due to flood conditions in the area. Th body was recovered after five days on August 26.

The appellants, Ramjee Rai and others, were the neighbour of the deceased and used to cut and take away the crops grown by the victims on their land.

Baijnath had to pay with the life of his wife for protesting against the threat of his crop.

A bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and Dalveer Bhandari in their judgment dated August 24, rejected the contention of the appellants that since the body was not recovered it could not be confirmed that the body recovered was that of victim.

The court observed, '' It is now well settled that what is necessary for proving the prosecution case is not the quantity but quality of the evidence. The court can not overlook the changes in the value system in society. When an offence is committed in a village owing to a land dispute, independent witnesses may not come forward.'' The court further ruled, '' It is now a trite law that corpus deliceti need not be proved. Discovery of the dead body is a rule of caution and not of law. In the event there exists strong circumstantial evidence, a judgment of conviction can be recorded even in the absence of the dead body.'' UNI AKS/ SC SI VV1819