Faulty investigation should not affect verdict, rules SC

Accused K Yarappa Reddy8217;s and Rekha8217;s affair began when she was studying in college. One of his love letters reached Rekha8217;s father, who extracted a promise from her that she would not marry anyone against the wishes of her parents. But Yarappa continued to meet Rekha and persisted her to marry him.On thefateful day, Rekha, who had by then joined a coach factory, had gone to her office. Yarappa persuaded her to go along with him to the residence of a family friend to discuss matters. When his friend, Sharadamma, went in to bring them coffee, Yarappa angered by Rekha8217;s refusal to marry him, took out a chopper from his bag and attacked him.

Sharadamma heard her Rekha8217;s cries and found her bleeding on the floor. The accused later went to the police station, surrendered the weapon and confessed that he had killed Rekha. This was the basis of the entire prosecution case. Sharadamma was a witness and stood by the prosecution version, and the trial court awarded life imprisonment to the accused.

On appeal, the High Court disbelieved the testimony of Sharadamma and launched a scathing criticism against the investigation. The High Court accepted the defence contention that the injuries on the deceased could not have been caused by the chopper, allegedly used in the crime. Regarding the incriminating conduct of theaccused that he surrendered before the police station, the High Court made a frontal attack on the evidence of the sub-inspector before whom the accused appeared with the blood-stained chopper. The High Court also doubted the case diary and ultimately acquitted the accused.

8220;It can be a guiding principle that as investigation is not the solitary area for judicial scrutiny in a criminal trial, the conclusion of the court in the case cannot be allowed to depend solely on the probity of investigation. It is well nigh settled that even if the investigation is illegal or even suspicious, the rest of evidence must be scrutinised independently of it, otherwise criminal trial will plummet to the level of the investigating officers ruling the roost. The court must have pre-dominance and pre-eminence in criminal trials over the action taken by the investigating officers,8221; the Supreme Court observed in its 20-page judgment.

After going through the entire record and evidence in the case, the court held that theaccused alone was the murderer of Rekha. 8220;The Sessions Court had rightly convicted the accused. The High Court erroneously upset such a well-merited conclusion,8221; the court observed in its final verdict.