Even One Link in Chain Of Circumstances Is Broken, Accused Must Get Benefit: Kerala High Court Acquits Man Convicted For Rape And

On September 24, 2024, the Kerala High Court in Ansar V.K. v. State of Kerala, CRL.A No. 981 of 2021, overturned the conviction of Ansar V.K. for rape, murder, and robbery under Sections 376A, 392, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court found that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, pointing to inconsistencies in witness testimonies, lack of conclusive forensic evidence, and improper recovery procedures.

The Court found critical gaps in the chain of circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution, including unreliable witness testimonies, lack of forensic corroboration, and procedural lapses in the recovery of stolen items.

The appellant, Ansar V.K., was convicted by the Special Court for the Trial of Offences Against Women and Children, Thalassery, for the rape and murder of a woman named Reeja on August 14, 2017. The prosecution alleged that Ansar intercepted Reeja while she was out to buy fish, attempted to sexually assault her, and then drowned her in a water channel, also stealing her gold ornaments. Ansar was arrested within 24 hours of the crime, and based on witness testimonies and the recovery of stolen ornaments, he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under Sections 376A (rape leading to death), 392 (robbery), and 302 (murder) of the IPC.

The prosecution’s case heavily relied on circumstantial evidence, particularly the testimonies of witnesses who allegedly saw the appellant near the crime scene. The Court, however, found these testimonies inconsistent. PWs 9, 10, and 11 provided contradictory accounts regarding the appellant's presence and the muddy state of his clothes. The Court held:

“The mere presence of the appellant near the crime scene and recovery of ornaments are insufficient to establish guilt in the absence of a complete chain of evidence.” [Paras 16-21]

The prosecution attempted to link Ansar to the crime through forensic evidence, including the recovery of semen from the deceased’s body and soil samples from the appellant’s clothes. However, DNA analysis was inconclusive due to insufficient material, and the soil found on the appellant’s clothes did not match the soil at the crime scene. The Court noted:

“The absence of conclusive DNA and soil evidence significantly weakened the prosecution's case.” [Paras 24-25]

The gold ornaments were recovered based on the appellant’s disclosure statement, but the Court found the recovery inadmissible. The Investigating Officer failed to properly record the appellant’s exact words, and no independent witnesses were present during the recovery process, violating Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The Court held:

“The recovery was not in accordance with law and could not be used to infer guilt.” [Paras 33-39]

Minor injuries were found on the appellant during a medical examination, but the prosecution failed to establish their age or link them to the crime. Furthermore, the absence of injuries in the deceased’s genitalia contradicted the prosecution’s claim of rape. The Court observed:

“The injuries on the appellant were insufficient to connect him to the murder or sexual assault.” [Paras 42]

The Kerala High Court meticulously analyzed each piece of evidence presented by the prosecution and concluded that none of the circumstances conclusively proved the appellant’s guilt. The Court reiterated that the prosecution must establish a chain of events so complete that no other hypothesis except the guilt of the accused is possible.

"If even one link in the chain of circumstances is broken, the accused must get the benefit thereof. In this case, several links were found to be weak or missing entirely." [Paras 43]

The Court also criticized the investigative lapses, particularly the failure to conduct a thorough forensic analysis and the improper handling of recovery evidence.

As a result, the Court set aside Ansar’s conviction and ordered his immediate release, stating:

“We acquit the appellant and direct that he be set at liberty forthwith, if his continued incarceration is not required in any other case.” [Paras 43]

The Kerala High Court’s judgment in Ansar V.K. v. State of Kerala sets a precedent on the importance of a complete and unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence in securing a conviction. The ruling also highlights the need for rigorous forensic investigation and proper adherence to legal procedures in recovery evidence under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

Date of Decision: September 24, 2024