Thane, May 22 (PTI) A Thane district court has acquitted two persons in a 2020 'murder' case, citing the prosecution's failure to recover the victim's body and a lack of conclusive evidence, calling it a "classic case of corpus delicti".
Principal District and Sessions Court Judge S B Agrawal acquitted the duo, Gaurav Rajesh Singh (32) and Sachin Sarjerao Patil (30), of murder and other charges related to the alleged killing of one Rakesh Manik Patil in Thane in September 2020 apparently over a property dispute.
The court cited the prosecution's failure to recover the victim's body and a lack of conclusive evidence as primary reasons for the acquittal in an order dated May 17, whose copy was made available on Thursday.
In its ruling, the court mentioned the concept of corpus delicti (Latin for “body of the crime”) - a fundamental legal principle that says a crime must be proven to have occurred before an individual can be held responsible for committing it.
The accused were charged under sections 302 (murder), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence), read with 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, and section 3(25) of the Arms Act.
The prosecution alleged that on September 20, 2020, the accused shot Rakesh Patil with a country-made pistol at the residence of his father, Manik Patil, a former Shiv Sena corporator, and then disposed of his body in a creek. The body was never found.
Judge Agrawal, in his verdict, emphasized the foundational weakness of the prosecution's case.
"At the outset, it would be apposite to mention that the case of prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, and in a case based on circumstantial evidence, it is incumbent on the prosecution to prove various links in chain of evidence led by the prosecution satisfactorily," he observed.
This chain of evidence ought to point to the guilt of the accused with reasonable definiteness, leaving no rational hypothesis which is in consonance with the innocence of the accused, the court noted.
The most critical factor in the case was the absence of the victim's body.
"As far as the circumstances of present matter are concerned, the most important aspect is that the body of the deceased has not been found and thus, it is a classic case corpus delicti," Judge Agrawal stated.
The motive for the alleged killing was a dispute over Manik Patil's property as deceased Rakesh Patil was his biological son, while accused Sachin Patil was the son of another woman who resided with Manik Patil, a local politician.
The court scrutinized key evidence, including CCTV footage.
Regarding the CCTV footage purportedly showing accused Sachin Patil in the victim's car near Vashi creek in Navi Mumbai, Judge Agrawal noted, "There is no forensic examination of CCTV footage. In such circumstances, oral evidence of PW2 (witness) Kavita Patil (victim's wife) in respect of watching CCTV footage and identifying car and accused-Sachin therein would not be of much help to the prosecution."
The recovery of a pistol at the instance of accused Sachin Patil was also deemed insufficient by the court.
"In absence of any ballistic report and evidence that victim died because of bullet injury, even this purported recovery does not take the case of prosecution further, so far as it relates to murder of victim being committed by the accused persons," the judge remarked.
Similarly, spot panchanamas (inspection) and alleged disclosures by the accused did not strengthen the prosecution's case. Chemical analysis reports on seized articles showed "inconclusive human blood."
Contrasting the case with precedents where convictions have occurred without a body being found, Judge Agrawal noted, "The facts in the present case are, however, entirely different in as much as there is no semblance of evidence to even infer that the victim actually has died."
The court found the chain of circumstantial evidence incomplete.
"Thus, looking at all the aforesaid evidence, it cannot be said that the chain of circumstances is completed pointing to the guilt of accused, especially in case where the body of deceased is not found. Considering all the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be said that the prosecution has been successful in proving the guilt of the accused," Judge Agrawal concluded.