# Konbi liarsan Jadao v. litale of

- **Citation:** [1962] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 726
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1959-04-14
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 223 of 1959
- **Bench:** J. L. Kapur, R.to.GIIUBAR DAYAL
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/konbi-liarsan-jadao-v-litale-of-2340
- **Pages:** 8

## Headnote

Criminal Trial-Et-idenct of anrot'-r-Corroioration on
mat.rial partiou/ara-Other circum•tanct• to be con•UtrtdCMniical !Czaminer'• evidenct, if can bt taken into Conoi<kration
tn duidt idtntily of haira-lndian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of
1860), 302, 201-IAdia EWknct Act, 1872 (1of1872), a. 45.
The appellant and two othcn were convicted for murder
undtr "· 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
The High
Court acc,pted the testimony of the appro'''r as being a
reliable piece of evidence. It relieJ upon the <liscovery of
the dtad body of the deceased at the instance uf t lte appellant
and of hlord sralned buttons also at his instance and attached
importanc(':.to tile scarf recovered from the pit \\·here the dead
body was alkgcJ to have been first buried and "hid1 had
hair> both of the appellant as well as the deceased.
The apprll.mt contended
that the evidence of the
approver, even 1h.Jugh it had been accepted as true, was not
corrohorated in 1naterial particulan connecting the appellant
with the ofJCncc.
None of the recoveries arc corroborative
of the statement of the approver to the extent of connecting
the appcllanl with the offence committed ; on the other hand
they are somewhat contradictory of the statement.
~fhc
evidence of the CheJnical Examiner was not sufficient to prove
that hairs on the scraf were of the appellant or of the deceased
because the Chemical Examiner was no expert on this matter
and his evidence WM not admissible under s. 45 of the
Evidence ,\ct and, at the most, according to the Chemical
Examiner the hairs resembled those of the appellant.
Held, that where the evidence of the approver is held
not to be very helpful to the prosecution other circumstance>
2 S.C.H ..
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
727
besides the evidence of tbe approver has to be considered.
The mere fact that the dead body was pointed out by the
appellant or was discovered as a result of a statement made by
him would not necessarily lead to the conclusion of the offence
of m"Jrder.
In the present case beside the evidence of the approver,
the appellant's pointing out of the dead body, his pointing out
the silver buttons of the deceased which were stained with
human blood and the presence of his hairs on a pania (scraf)
on which there were the hairs of the deceased also, are
important facts which are sufficient evidence to connect the
a.ppellant with the commission of the offence.
Held, further, that writers of medical jurisprudence have
stated that from microscopic cxa1nination of the hairs it is
possible to say whether they are of· the same or of different
colours or sizes and from the examination it lnay help in
deciding where the hairs come from.
Vemireddy Satyanarayan Reddy v. State of Hyderabad,
[1956] S.C.R. 247 and Wasim Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh,
[I ~56] S.C.R. 19 l, relied on.

## Text

19112
n. r ...... i.x
Ofiur, JIHros
. '·
S. Ir. Huihll.V.,
Jlw.,
SWJ.
19112
726 SUPREME COU!t'f REPOI~T~ [ l ·• 2j SU Pf.
reaseessment of tho firm disclosing an error made
before April I, 19.5~.
The appeals therefore fail and a.re dismissed
with costs. One hearing fee.
Appeals dismissed.
KANBI KARSAN JADAV
v.
STATE OF GUJARAT
(J. L. KAPUR and R.to.GIIUBAR DAYAL, ,JJ.)
Criminal Trial-Et-idenct of anrot'-r-Corroioration on
mat.rial partiou/ara-Other circum•tanct• to be con•UtrtdCMniical !Czaminer'• evidenct, if can bt taken into Conoi<kration
tn duidt idtntily of haira-lndian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of
1860), 302, 201-IAdia EWknct Act, 1872 (1of1872), a. 45.
The appellant and two othcn were convicted for murder
undtr "· 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
The High
Court acc,pted the testimony of the appro'''r as being a
reliable piece of evidence. It relieJ upon the <liscovery of
the dtad body of the deceased at the instance uf t lte appellant
and of hlord sralned buttons also at his instance and attached
importanc(':.to tile scarf recovered from the pit \\·here the dead
body was alkgcJ to have been first buried and "hid1 had
hair> both of the appellant as well as the deceased.
The apprll.mt contended
that the evidence of the
approver, even 1h.Jugh it had been accepted as true, was not
corrohorated in 1naterial particulan connecting the appellant
with the ofJCncc.
None of the recoveries arc corroborative
of the statement of the approver to the extent of connecting
the appcllanl with the offence committed ; on the other hand
they are somewhat contradictory of the statement.
~fhc
evidence of the CheJnical Examiner was not sufficient to prove
that hairs on the scraf were of the appellant or of the deceased
because the Chemical Examiner was no expert on this matter
and his evidence WM not admissible under s. 45 of the
Evidence ,\ct and, at the most, according to the Chemical
Examiner the hairs resembled those of the appellant.
Held, that where the evidence of the approver is held
not to be very helpful to the prosecution other circumstance>
2 S.C.H ..
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
727
besides the evidence of tbe approver has to be considered.
The mere fact that the dead body was pointed out by the
appellant or was discovered as a result of a statement made by
him would not necessarily lead to the conclusion of the offence
of m"Jrder.
In the present case beside the evidence of the approver,
the appellant's pointing out of the dead body, his pointing out
the silver buttons of the deceased which were stained with
human blood and the presence of his hairs on a pania (scraf)
on which there were the hairs of the deceased also, are
important facts which are sufficient evidence to connect the
a.ppellant with the commission of the offence.
Held, further, that writers of medical jurisprudence have
stated that from microscopic cxa1nination of the hairs it is
possible to say whether they are of· the same or of different
colours or sizes and from the examination it lnay help in
deciding where the hairs come from.
Vemireddy Satyanarayan Reddy v. State of Hyderabad,
[1956] S.C.R. 247 and Wasim Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh,
[I ~56] S.C.R. 19 l, relied on.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal
Appeal No. 223 of 1959.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment
and ordered dated April 14, 1959, of the former
Bombay High Court (Rajkot Bench) at Rajkot in
Criminal Appeal No. 84 of 1958.
N·ur-ud-din Ahmed and K. L. Hatki for appel·
lant.
H. R. Khanna and R.H. Dkebar, for respondent.
1962. January 24. The Judgment of the
Court was delivered by
KAPUR, J.-The appellant and two others
were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Gohihvad, under ss. 302 and 21)1 of the Indian
Penal Codu for the murdPr of Kanji aud they were
sentenced to imprisonment for life under the former
section and to seven years' rigorous imprisonment
under the latter. The sentenc" were eoncur-r«nt.
On appeal the High Court set aside the conviction
1962
Konbi liarsan
Jadao
v.
litale of Gujar•I
Kap"' J.
'962
KwiKuJq ..
v.
SW. of GujOT•I
K-J.
728 SUPREME COCltT REPORTS [1962] SUPP.
of Nanji Ravji but upheld the convictions and l!t'n·
tenccs of the appollant and Karamshi Bhawan. The
appellant has come in appeal to this Court by
Special leave.
The deceased Kanji was rather an unsavoury
character in villag<i Chirodo. and it is alleged that
he had a illicit connection with Shrimati ::,bantu
the sistor of Karamshi and also used to follow
about Smt. Baghu the sister of the appellant
for a. similar object.
It is stated that five
days before the occurrence the appellant Karsan,
Karamshi, Nanji and Gumansinh approver met and
decided to murder tile appellant. With that ohjcct
in ·view Gumansinh approver wns to decoy the
deceased to the Vadi of the appellant and there the
murder was to be committed. At about sunset on
March 19, 1958, the deceased was decoyed to the
place as previously arranged and therl' he was murdered by the appellant who gave him a few blows,
with a sharp cutting instrument called Dharia.
According to the statement of the approver the
dead body was. wrapped in the scarf of tho deceased
and was carried by the appellant from the place
of the murder
to the dry bed of the river
and there it was hurried in a pit. Nothing was
heard of the murder or of the deceased till on March
26, 1958, a brother of the deoeased ma.do a report
to the police about his disappearance and that he
suspected the three uncles of the appellant, subsequently the
appellant and the other accused
persons
were
taken
into
custody by the
police. One of them while in the custody t-f
the police, was allowed to go to the village and
he asked the help of Shamji and Manila! P.Ws. He
also made a confeBSion to them and they reported
the matter to the police. On March 31, 1958,
Gumansinh
and
Karamshi
ma.de
confcasions
2 s.c.R. SUPREJ-IE COURT REPOR'£ci
72ll
which were recorded by a Magistrate.
Between
March 26 and March 31, recoveries
of variotts
articles. were m1td~. At the instance of the appellant, it is stated, the dead body and then the head
of the deceased was recovered from a lfoitant well.
At tho instance of Nanji en :Vlarch 28, 195S a scDrf
was, discovered in the pit in which the dearl body
was according to the approver, buried. On
the
scarf, !here were some hairs which on analysis by
the Chemical Examiner were fonnd to be similar
to the hairs of the appellant and of the deceased.
A day previous, i. e. March :!7, 1958, at the instance
of the appellant silver buttons which were stained
with human blood were discovered from the fieH of
the appellant at small stick like a button belonging to the deceased was also found at his instanue.
The High Court rejected the confession of
Karamshi on the ground that it was not voluntary.
It acquitted Nanji on the ground that there were
no corroboration in regnrd to him of the apprl•Ver's
statement, the place where the dead body was buried
was not dis<'overed at his instance, his production
of stick and shirt and trousers from his house was
of no consequence, and the oral evidence was contrary to the medical evidence and Karamshi's confessional statement could not be used agamst Nanji.
In regard to the appellant the High Court
accepted the testimony of the approver as being a
reliable piece of evidence. It attached no importance to the recovery of the cutting instrument,
Dharia, nor to the discovery of the stick ( Dhoka)
at his instance. But the High Court did rely upon
the discovery of the dead body of the deceased, i.e.
the trunk and the head, at. the instance of the appellant and of the blood-stamed buttons also at his
instance and attached importance to scarf renovered
from the pit where the dead body was alleged to
have been first buried and which had hairs both of
the appellant as well as of the deceased.
1 62
Kanbi Karsan
J11dav
V.
State (Jf G~iarat
Kapur J.
1962
Ktnthi Ktrrsan
Jadao
v.
StaU of Gu;arat
Kapur J.
730 SUPREME COlRT REPORTS ll962) SUPP.
It was argued for the appellant that the <'Vidence of the approver, even though it had
been
accepted as true, was not corroborated in material
particulars connecting the appellant with the offence.
On the other hand it was contradicted.
The appr1Jver had btated that the dead body was buried in
a pit in the dry bed of the river but wht•n thl\t pit
was dug up the dead body was not found there and
unly a piece of ulna bone and a heel of a human foot
were found and all these recoveries had be(·n made
earlier and so could not be ca.lied corroborative in
material particulars. It was further submitted that
there was no evidence to show as to when ;ind how
the body of the deceased was removed from tho pit,
dismembered and thrown into the well. 1 he recovery of the scarf, it was pointed out, was all innocuous
circumstance because
on
tht> evidence
produced it had not been shown to belong to the
appellant but to hiR father and th(' evidencc of
the Chemic'.\! Examiner was not sufiicieut, to prove
that the hairs on the scarf were of the appellant
or of the deceased because the Chemical Examiner
was certainly no expert on this matter ancl his
evidence was not admiBBible under s. 4i) of the
Evidence Act, and at the most, according to tho
Chemical Examiuer's report the hairs resembled
those of the appeilant. And secondly according to
the approver the dead body of the deceased was
wrapped in his own pania (scarf). lt was further
submitteci that the statement in regard to tho
recovery of the trunk and the head will only show
that tho appellant knew where tho trunk and the
head were, which at the most would lead to an inference of an offence under s. :10 l and not of s. 302.
What the law requires in the case of an
accomplice's evidence is that there should be such
corroboration of the material Parts of the story
connecting the accused with the crime as will satisfy
reasonable minds that the approver can be regarded
..
2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS
731
as a truthful witness. The corroboration need not be
direct evidence of the commission of the offence
by the accused.
If it is merely circumstantial
evidence of his connection with the crime it will be
sufficient and the nature of the corroboration wiil
depend on and vary with the circumstances of each
case.
Vemireddy Satyanarayan Reddy v. The State of
Hyderabad(').
The confessional statement mad(•
by the
approver on March 31, 1958 gave the following
facts connecting the appellant with the murder.
( l) The appdlant gave dharia blow to the decl'Jased.
The dharia bad li!ready been discovered and it has
been disregarded from the evidence by the High
Court as being of no importance. The next thing
stated by the approver was that the deceased's
body was tied in a pania (scarf).
He did not state
that the scad in which it was bound belonged to
the appellant. The next fact stated by him was
that the appellant carried the body of the deceased
and then it was
buried in a pit and lastly
he stated that the appellant h11d told him that the
head of the deceased had been thrown into a well.
None of these recoveries in the circumstances of
this case are corroborative of the statement of the
approver to the extent of connecting the appellant
with the offence commited. On the other hand,
they are somewhat contradictory of the statement
because the pania (scarf) which was found in the
pit has now been stated to belong to the appellant.
The dead body was not found in tile pit, the head
had already been discovered and the trnuk had also
been taken out of the well. In these circ•umstances
it was submitted that the approver's statement
cannot be said to have been corroborated in
material particulars.
But there are other circumstances which have
to be considered even if the evidence of the
approver is held uot to be very helpful to the
prosecution. Firstly, thern is the pointing out of
(I) [1956] S. C.R. 247. 252.
1962
Karibi Karsan
Jridov
v.
State ,,JG1ljara(
Kap•1r J.
1\anbi K <d1tU1
Jadori
v.
Stolt of Gijrutll
Kap"' J.
732 SUPHEME COl:RT REPORTS [1962] SUPP.
tho dead body by the appellant from the well ;
secondly,
the di8covery of the
blood-stained
(stained with human blood) buttons nt the instance
of tho appellant ; thirdly the srarf which has been
held t'' belong to the
appelh~nt and which was
found from the pit pointed out by the co-accused
Nanji and fourthly by tho presenct· of the hairs of
the appellant and of the deceased on that scarf.
The men·
fa.ct that the dead bodv was
pointed out by the appella11t or was tliocovered as
a result of a statement made by him would not
nece88arily lead to the conclusion of the dfonce
of murder. But there are other circumstances
which have to be considered. The discovery of
the buttons with bloodstains at the instance of tho
appellant is a circumstance which may iaise the
presumption of tho partir:ipation of the appellant
in the murder, In Wa8in Khan v. The State of
Uttar Pradesh (1), it was held that the recent and
unexplained possession of stolen property would be
presumptive evidence against a prisonn on a charge
of roblicry as also of a charge of murder. But it must
depend upon the circumstancl's of each case.
The
third piece of ev idenoo to be considered is
the
recovery of the p<mia i.e. scarf. No doul t lhl'le is no
state!Il('llt by the approver that the scarf in which the
dead bndy was taken was thJ.t of the appellant.
But a sr,arf bas been found which tht· Hig!i Court
has held as beJ.mging to the appelll\nt and hairs
both of the dec·•at>ed a8 well as of the t•ppellant
were found on tl:.at scarf.
It was argm•d that the
finding of the hairs was of no conHequence and
at least the Chemical Examinrr "'as wit the proper
1·xpert who could depose a& to the similnrity or
otherwise of thl' hair~. Tho writers on mt>dical
jurisprudence, however, ha,·e stated that from the
microscopic examination of th•· hairs it i:; po~sible
to.say whether thoy 11r0 (If th0 same or of 1lifferi;nt
colours or
Ri1,.-~ and from 1.hA <•Xnmination it ma:v
help in deciding where the hairs come from.
In
\I) [19:.0J S. C.R. 191.
2 s.c.R. SUPREME COURT .REPORTS
733
Taylor's Medical Jurisprudence (1956 Edn.) Voi. 1,
at page 122, some cases ar~ given showing that
hairs were identified as belonging to particular
persons.
Thus, we have besi<les the evidence of the
approver three important facts which connect the
appellant with the commission of the offence.
His pointing out the dead body, his pointing out
the silver buttons of the deceased which were stained
with huma.n blood and the presence of his hairs on
a pania (scarf) on whicli there were the hairs of
the deceased .also. In our opinion this would be
sufficient evidence in thA circumstances of the
present case
to connect· the avpellant with the
commission of the offence.
We, therefore, dismiss the appeal.
Appeal disn. iss(d.
---
BASANTRAM
.,,
UNION OF INDIA
(P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR andK. N. WANC1HOO, JJ.)
Evacuee Property--Inclu<ion in compensation. poolr-Effect
-Power of Central Government-AdminiBtration of Evac"ee
Property (Central) R"lea, r. 14 (6)-AdminiBtration of li'vacue<
Property .1ct, 1950-Tlte displ~ced persons (Comp,nBation and
Rekahilitation) ·4.ct, (XUV qf 1954), ss. 12, 14, 16 and 19.
The appellants migrated to India in 1947 from West
Pakistan. To begin with, they were given temporary allotment of land in two villages.
In 1949, land was allotted to
them on qua~i-pern1anent basis, and they have remained in
possession of the same eversince.
Originally, land was classi ..
fied into two kinds : urban and agricultural land. Later on;
a third classification was introduced, known as sub-urban
land.
fhe two villages in which land was allotted to the
appellants were not included in. the notification with respect
to sub-urban land.
In February, 1952,
the Director of
Rehabilitation passed an order declaring those villages as
L9af --
K11nb; liarsan
Jadav
v.
State ofGujaud
-
Kapur J.
1"62
January21.