Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court observed that the word “fact”, as contemplated under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, is not only limited to “actual physical material object”, but includes mental awareness or the knowledge of the accused as to its existence.
The Court was considering the appeal filed by Asar Mohamad and others. Asar and Asraf are sons of Akthar Mohammad who had another wife named Zahida and a son named Ishlam. The case relates to the murder of Zahida and Ishlam. During the course of investigation, Asar confessed to the police that he, along with his brother and father, committed murder of both Zahida and Ishlam and thereafter, dumped their dead bodies into the septic tank in the backyard of their house. All the accused were convicted by the trial court, which was later confirmed by the high court.
The bench, comprising of Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice L Nageswara Rao, confirmed the concurrent conviction on the accused (Asar) and after referring to judgment in Vasanta Sampat Dupare v. State of Maharashtra, said that it is a settled legal position that the facts need not be self probatory and the word “fact” as contemplated in Section 27 of the Evidence Act is not limited to “actual physical material object”. The discovery of fact arises by the reason of the fact that the information given by the accused exhibited the knowledge or the mental awareness of the informant as to its existence at a particular place which includes discovery of an object, the place from which it is produced and the knowledge of the accused as to its existence.
After perusing the entire evidence and taking the totality of the proved circumstances into account, the SC found Asar Mohaamed guilty, in agreement with the conclusion reached by the trial court, who had confessed to the police and also led the police party to the place where the dead bodies were dumped.
86540
103860
630
114
59824