Where’s the proof? Jharkhand High Court overturns murder conviction, life terms for husband, kin in 25-year-old case

Background

• The matter originated from the death of Rekha Devi, who was married to the petitioner in 1988, approximately 10 to 12 years before the incident.
• Following allegations that her husband had entered into a second marriage and subjected her to cruelty, the wife had filed a complaint under Section 498A (cruelty by husband or relative) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and was residing at her parental home.
• On July 15, 2000, during a court hearing regarding the complaint, it was alleged that the wife proceeded to her matrimonial home with her husband and in-laws, following an oral direction from the court.
• But the accused persons did not take Rekha to the matrimonial home, but killed her on the way and threw the body into a well at Chandi Dih Bahiyar.
• In 2003, the trial court found the accused petitioners, including the husband, guilty of murder and disappearance of evidence under Sections 302 (murder), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence), and 34 (common intention) of the IPC.

Circumstances relied upon by prosecution

• There was a tense relationship between the deceased and her husband, Kishore Pandit, due to the solemnisation of a second marriage by Kishore.
• On account of having a second wife, the petitioner used to physically assault and torture his first wife frequently.
• On account of the torture meted out to her, Rekha left her matrimonial home, started residing at her parental home, and instituted a case under Section 498A against her husband and in-laws.

Findings

• There is no whisper in the trial court order that the petitioners were directed to take the complainant with them to the matrimonial home.
• There is also no whisper in the evidence by the informant-cum-father of the deceased that on the date fixed in August 2000, the victim went to attend the court alone or accompanied by her father or by any other family members.
• It also appears that not a single witness examined by the prosecution has been able to prove that the deceased and the accused persons were seen together on August 15, 2000, near the place of occurrence.
• There is no evidence that the deceased was assaulted by the accused persons and they threw her into a well.
• The informant has also not specifically stated that on August 15, 2000, he was present in the court along with his daughter, or that the deceased proceeded from the court along with the accused persons as per the direction of the court.
• The prosecution has also not proved the factum of the second marriage of the petitioner-husband, and no cognisance of the offence under Section 494 (marrying again during the lifetime of spouse).