Neelam Kumari vs The State Of Himachal Pradesh

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013

NEELAM KUMARI …APPELLANT

VERSUS

THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH …RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal challenges the impugned judgment and

order dated 11th December, 2009 passed by the High Court of

Himachal Pradesh whereby the conviction and sentence of the

appellant has been affirmed. The appellant has been convicted

under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601 for committing

murder of her infant son and has been sentenced to undergo

imprisonment for life by the Trial Court.

2. The facts in brief are that Nikku Ram (PW-1), who is the Signature Not Verified

complainant and husband of the appellant, was married to Nirmala Digitally signed by NISHA KHULBEY Date: 2025.08.21 19:53:55 IST Reason:

1 For short, ‘the IPC’

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 1 of 13 Devi in 1982. As there was no issue out of the said wedlock, in

2004, with the consent of Nirmala Devi, Nikku Ram married the

appellant and started residing with her in a newly constructed

house at village Nand. However, Nikku Ram provided a separate

residence to his first wife Nirmala Devi in his ancestral village Katli.

3. In 2005, the appellant gave birth to a male child. The

appellant never visited the ancestral village Katli and she used to

dissuade her husband also from visiting the said village. The

appellant used to threaten Nikku Ram that if she is compelled to

visit village Katli, she would kill her son.

4. When father of Nikku Ram died on 3rd December, 2006, the

appellant did not visit village Katli to mourn his death. She only

visited the village Katli on 8th December, 2006 along with her infant

child. However, she returned the same day along with her husband

and the infant child. Thereafter, Nikku Ram along with his brother

went to market to purchase some grocery items to perform post-

death rituals of his father, leaving behind the appellant and his

child in the house at village Nand. Around 08:30 p.m., when Nikku

Ram returned to his house in village Nand, he did not find his wife

and child there. He enquired about them from his tenant Dr.

Sandesh Guleria (PW-2). Thereafter, he went to village Katli and

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 2 of 13 stayed there for a night. On 9th December, 2006 at 07:30 a.m.,

Nikku Ram received a telephonic call from the appellant asking

about his whereabouts. At the same time, one Ram Pal informed

Nikku Ram that he should reach his village Nand as his son was ill.

Thereafter, he proceeded to his village Nand and found his son lying

on the cot. Dr. Sandesh Guleria (PW-2), who was the tenant of

Nikku Ram, examined the child and told Nikku Ram to immediately

take the child to the hospital at Nalagarh as the child was appeared

to have been strangulated. There was a circular mark found on the

neck of the child which had turned blue. The child was taken to

the hospital at Nalagarh where the doctor declared that the child

was brought dead.

5. On the basis of the statement of Nikku Ram, a first

information report came to be registered. The dead body of the child

was sent for autopsy. On examination of the dead body, Dr. Sunita

Sood (PW-10) found nail marks on the left side and ligature marks

around the neck extending up to back. Lungs, heart and vessels

were found congested. The contents of the abdomen were in liquid

form. As per doctor’s opinion, the cause of death was asphyxia.

Doctor confirmed that the death was due to throttling. Dr. Sunita

Sood (PW-10) stated that the ligature marks found on the neck of

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 3 of 13 the child were due to some pressure by dupatta which caused

asphyxia and led to death by throttling.

6. Extra-judicial confession admitting the killing of her son is

alleged to have been made by the appellant separately one before

Nikku Ram (PW-1) and Umrawati (PW-5), and another before

Bhagwanti (PW-4), Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Nand, in presence of

Krishan Lal (PW-3). However, the appellant pleaded not guilty.

7. The appellant was interrogated. On her interrogation, she

produced one green dupatta which was allegedly used by her in the

commission of the crime. As per the forensic report, blood and

human skin tissues were found on the dupatta.

8. The appellant’s version is that except her father-in-law, no one

liked her in her husband’s family. Nirmala Devi, first wife of Nikku

Ram, used to threaten her that if she would not leave her husband,

she would kill the child. According to her, on 8th December, 2006,

she stayed in village Katli for a night. She kept her child on the bed

of Nirmala Devi and she slept on the floor. When she woke up in the

morning, she found her son unconscious and unresponsive. She

took the child to a doctor. After examining the child, the doctor

advised her to take the child to the hospital at Nalagarh. When she

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 4 of 13 came out of the doctor’s room, her husband Nikku Ram had arrived

there, and both took the child to the hospital at Nalagarh. However,

Nikku Ram contradicted the version of the appellant. As per the

statement of Nikku Ram, the appellant never stayed in the house at

village Katli and she, in fact, stayed at village Karlata which was 01

kilometre away from village Nand.

9. The Trial Court after considering the evidence on record,

convicted the appellant and sentenced her to undergo imprisonment

for life vide judgment and order dated 20th July, 2007. An appeal

preferred by the appellant against her conviction and sentence came

to be dismissed vide impugned judgment and order dated 11th

December, 2009 passed by the High Court. Hence, this Appeal.

ANALYSIS & FINDINGS

10. The conviction of the appellant rests significantly on alleged

extra-judicial confessions made to her husband Nikku Ram (PW-1),

Ward Member Krishan Lal (PW-3), Pradhan Bhagwanti Devi (PW-4),

and Umrawati (PW-5).

11. It is settled law that extra-judicial confessions are generally

considered weak evidence and should be corroborated by other,

independent evidence. This Court in Sahadevan & Anr. vs. State

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 5 of 13 of Tamil Nadu2 aptly summarized this principle in the following

words:

“12. …It is a case based upon circumstantial evidence. In case of circumstantial evidence, the onus lies upon the prosecution to prove the complete chain of events which shall undoubtedly point towards the guilt of the accused. Furthermore, in case of circumstantial evidence, where the prosecution relies upon an extra- judicial confession, the court has to examine the same with a greater degree of care and caution. It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that extra- judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence. Wherever the Court, upon due appreciation of the entire prosecution evidence, intends to base a conviction on an extra-judicial confession, it must ensure that the same inspires confidence and is corroborated by other prosecution evidence. If, however, the extra-judicial confession suffers from material discrepancies or inherent improbabilities and does not appear to be cogent as per the prosecution version, it may be difficult for the court to base a conviction on such a confession. In such circumstances, the court would be fully justified in ruling such evidence out of consideration.”

12. This position of law has been followed in a plethora of

judgments of this Court, including SK. Yusuf vs. State of West

Bengal3, Pancho vs. State of Haryana4 and Jagroop Singh vs.

State of Punjab5. Further, this Court in Chandrapal vs. State of

Chhattisgarh (Earlier M.P.)6 had specifically held as follows:

“11. …However, this court has consistently held that an extra judicial confession is a weak kind of evidence

2 2012 INSC 209.

3 2011 INSC 415.

4 2011 INSC 773.

5 2012 INSC 296.

6 2022 INSC 629.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 6 of 13 and unless it inspires confidence or is fully corroborated by some other evidence of clinching nature, ordinarily conviction for the offence of murder should not be made only on the evidence of extra judicial confession. …”

13. It is to be noted that during examination of the appellant

under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19737, she

had negated the extra-judicial confessions and in the said

statement, she had provided an alternative explanation. She stated

that when she found her child unresponsive in the morning, she

started crying. On hearing her cries, two women came and made

enquiries. One of the women, namely Sita Devi, who was allegedly a

non-interested witness to the extra-judicial confession, was never

examined by the prosecution. While the prosecution is not required

to examine every possible witness, it must ensure that those

witnesses essential to substantiate the truth are produced before

the Court. Failure to do so without adequate explanation, may cast

doubt on the prosecution’s case as held by this Court in the case of

Gaurav Maini vs. The State of Haryana8 that non-examination of

a relevant witness at the trial persuades the Court to draw an

adverse inference against the prosecution.

7 For short, ‘the Cr.PC’ 8 2024 INSC 488.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 7 of 13

14. Beyond these alleged confessions, the case of the prosecution

rests heavily on circumstantial evidence. In this regard, we find it

pertinent to mention the five ‘golden principles’ for evaluating

circumstantial evidence which originated in Hanumant vs. The

State of Madhya Pradesh9 and crystallized in Sharad Birdhi

Chand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra10 namely:

(a) The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is

to be drawn should be fully established. The

circumstances concerned “must or should” and not “may

be” established;

(b) The facts so established should be consistent only with

the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say,

they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis

except that the accused is guilty;

(c) The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and

tendency;

(d) They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the

one to be proved; and

(e) There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to

leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion

9 1952 INSC 41.

10 1984 INSC 121.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 8 of 13 consistent with the innocence of the accused and must

show that in all human probability the act must have

been done by the accused.

15. At the outset, we note that the appellant’s whereabouts during

the most critical period are not conclusively established. Per her

husband Nikku Ram (PW-1), on 8th December, 2006, the appellant

came back to village Nand with him from village Katli. However, he

further stated that he did not find the appellant and the child at

their house in village Nand when he returned from Kainchi Mor at

around 08:30 pm on the same day, and the appellant called him the

following morning to enquire where he had spent the previous night

i.e., per his statement, husband and wife did not encounter each

other the night of 8th December, 2006. We also note that he has

admitted before the Trial Court that the house in village Katli was

double-storeyed, meaning the appellant could have been present

there overnight without his knowledge. Dr. Sandesh Guleria (PW-2),

residing in village Nand, also stated that he was asleep from 04:00

pm to 06:00 pm, and did not see the appellant post 06:00 pm.

16. The medical evidence suggests a significant gap between the

alleged time of strangulation and the medical examination, with

approximately two hours passing before death and eight hours

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 9 of 13 before examination. This extended timeline introduces considerable

uncertainty about when and how the fatal injuries occurred. In

other words, during this time gap, numerous events could have

transpired, and various individuals other than the appellant could

have had access to the child. In our view, this intervening period

weakens the prosecution’s ability to establish an unbroken chain of

events leading inexorably to the conclusion of the appellant’s guilt.

17. The recovery and treatment of the alleged murder weapon is

similarly troubling. It is the case of the prosecution that a green

dupatta used to murder the child (Ex.P2) was recovered from the

appellant during the interrogation in the presence of Krishan Lal

(PW-3) and Bhagwanti Devi (PW-4). It was noted by the Trial Court

that it is a commonly available dupatta, and that the appellant has

strenuously denied producing the same by her in her judicial

statement under Section 313 of the Cr.PC.

18. Furthermore, the dupatta was never shown to Dr. Sunita Sood

(PW-10) who conducted the postmortem examination. This creates a

fundamental disconnect in the chain of evidence. It seems obvious

that the doctor who determined the cause of death must be given

the opportunity to assess whether the alleged murder weapon was

consistent with the injuries observed on the deceased child.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 10 of 13

19. On the point of the alleged weapon, we also note that while the

forensic examination reportedly found blood stains and human skin

tissues on the dupatta, there is no evidence establishing that these

materials belonged to the deceased child himself. Therefore, their

presence on the dupatta cannot be conclusively linked to the

offence. Common items of clothing may contain various biological

materials from everyday use, and without specific identification,

such evidence remains ambiguous at best. The finding that the

cause of death “could be due to throttling” is also tentative.

20. We also find it pertinent to point out that if the appellant had

indeed killed her child, her subsequent conduct is difficult to

reconcile with guilt. Rather than attempting to conceal the crime or

flee, she proceeded to village Nand to seek medical assistance for the

child. Specifically, she took the child to their tenant, Dr. Sandesh

Guleria (PW-2). Logically, such behaviour is more consistent with

innocence than guilt. At the very least, represents a significant

inconsistency in the prosecution’s narrative. It is difficult to

reconcile that the appellant was cold-blooded enough to strangle her

own child but urgently sought medical help for that child shortly

thereafter.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 11 of 13

21. This Court has repeatedly affirmed that the strength of the

motive plays a crucial role in establishing the credibility of the

prosecution’s case. While a weak or absent motive alone may not be

sufficient to acquit an accused if other circumstances form a

complete chain pointing unerringly to guilt, it significantly weighs in

favour of the accused and creates a reasonable doubt. In this

regard, we reproduce a pertinent extract from this Court’s recent

decision in Anwar Ali & Anr. vs. The State of Himachal

Pradesh11:

“9. Now so far as the submission on behalf of the accused that in the present case the prosecution has failed to establish and prove the motive and therefore the accused deserves acquittal is concerned, it is true that the absence of proving the motive cannot be a ground to reject the prosecution case. It is also true and as held by this Court in the case of Suresh Chandra Bahri v. State of Bihar 1995 Supp (1) SCC 80 that if motive is proved that would supply a link in the chain of circumstantial evidence but the absence thereof cannot be a ground to reject the prosecution case. However, at the same time, as observed by this Court in the case of Babu (supra)12, absence of motive in a case depending on circumstantial evidence is a factor that weighs in favour of the accused. …”

22. The prosecution has failed to establish any convincing motive

for the appellant to commit the murder of her own child. The

suggestion that the appellant killed her child because her husband

visited village Katli for the last rites of his recently deceased father

11 2020 INSC 563.

12 Babu vs. State of Kerala, (2010) 9 SCC 189

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 12 of 13 defies logic, given that she herself visited village Katli along with him

and their child on 8th December, 2006. Moreover, such an extreme

act runs completely contrary to the natural instinct of a mother of

an infant child.

23. Based on the above analysis, we are of the view that the

prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the appellant beyond

reasonable doubt. The alleged extra-judicial confessions suffer from

serious infirmities and cannot be relied upon. The circumstantial

evidence, too, does not form a complete chain conclusively pointing

towards the guilt of the appellant.

24. In light of these findings, the Appeal is allowed. The conviction

and sentence of the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC is set

aside and the appellant is acquitted of the offence alleged against

her. Since the appellant was already on bail, she be discharged

from her bail bonds.

.………………............................J. (PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA)

……..…………..........................J. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)

NEW DELHI;

AUGUST 20, 2025.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2013 Page 13 of 13