Circumstantial Evidence: RES IPSA Loquitur In Criminal Cases

Background Facts

The High of Bombay has recently upheld the conviction of the appellant in an offence related to the murder of the three women and it can be concluded from the circumstantial evidence that the accused has committed the crime.

Case of the Prosecution

The prosecution alleged that three women out of which one was a mother and two sisters of the complainant went missing. Calls were received by the complainant from her mother’s phone stating that if she wishes to see her mother then she should come to an isolated location all alone.

After that complainant reached to police and she was intimidated by her cousin that one of her sisters had an intimate relationship with the appellant and for this reason, he drove out of the village. When the matter was brought to the knowledge of the prosecution, they arrested the appellant who confessed to killing three women.

Case of the Appellant

The appellant was convicted by the Alibaug Sessions Judge and the same move before HC challenging such conviction on the ground that prosecution relied on a lot of information that was provided by the appellant himself. He further alleged that the whole case was based on suspicion and conviction can’t take place without any proof.

Court’s Observation

The bench headed by Justices Sadhna S Jadhav and NR Borkar

The court observed that the accused wasn’t a resident of the locality where the bodies of the deceased were obtained. Though, there was no reason provided that why his wallet was found at the place where one dead body was obtained.

Further, it added that the prosecution was able to demonstrate that the wallet contained a driving license affixed with a photograph, a card of Royal Twinkle, Star club belonging to the accused, the election card, the visiting card of a political leader, and other photographs when received.

Apart from it, the photograph of one of the deceased along with her cell phone was also received from the accused house.

Court’s Order

The Court upheld the conviction and observed that circumstance says it all and ordered the appellant to surrender before the Sessions Court if out on bail or parole within 8 weeks.

What is Res Ipsa Loquitur?

It is a Latin term that means thing speaks for itself. The concept of Res Ipsa Loquitur operates as an evidentiary rule and allows the plaintiff to establish a rebuttable presumption of negligence on part of the defendant through the use of any circumstantial evidence. Any plaintiff has to prove that defendant acted in a negligent state of mind by putting forth certain circumstantial facts and then the burden of proof lies on the defendant to prove that there was no negligence of mind.

What is your take on such an order passed by the Court in respect of declining the appeal? Tell us in the comments below.