Supreme Court Acquits Woman Accused of Husband’s Murder Due to Lack of Evidence

The case of Dev Kanya Tiwari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh is a significant ruling in criminal jurisprudence, where the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a woman accused of murdering her husband. The judgment highlighted the importance of circumstantial evidence, procedural lapses, and the benefit of the doubt principle in criminal cases.

The appellant, Dev Kanya Tiwari, was convicted under Section 302/34 IPC (murder with common intent) by the Additional Sessions Court and the Allahabad High Court. However, the Supreme Court found inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case and ultimately acquitted her.

Background of the Case

The case dates back to September 30, 1995, when Shashi Bhushan Tiwari (PW5) lodged an FIR at Karchhana Police Station, Allahabad, alleging that his brother, Brij Bhushan Tiwari, was murdered by his wife, Santosh Devi, and his mother-in-law, Dev Kanya Tiwari (the appellant). The complainant suspected that his brother had been strangled to death.

Upon investigation, the police arrested both accused, and the case proceeded to trial. During the pendency of the trial, Santosh Devi (the wife of the deceased) passed away, leaving Dev Kanya Tiwari as the sole accused.

Prosecution’s Case

The prosecution presented the following evidence:

Dr. Ashok Kumar Gupta (PW6), who conducted the postmortem, stated that the deceased died due to asphyxia caused by strangulation.
Shashi Bhushan Tiwari (PW5) claimed that the accused had confessed to him about committing the murder.
The Investigating Officer, Veer Bahadur Singh (PW8), found a ligature mark on the deceased’s neck.
The prosecution argued that the accused had a motive due to domestic disputes.

Defense’s Case

The accused, Dev Kanya Tiwari, denied all allegations, contending:

The deceased had committed suicide by consuming poisonous tablets.
There were no independent eyewitnesses to the alleged murder.
Her co-accused, Santosh Devi, had also denied the allegations before her death.
The prosecution failed to preserve the viscera of the deceased, which could have confirmed poisoning.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court found serious inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case. The Court noted:

“The prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of events that would lead to an inescapable conclusion that the accused committed the crime.”

The Court also observed:

“There was an alternative version of the incident, wherein the deceased allegedly consumed poison. The failure to preserve the viscera casts doubt on the prosecution’s theory of strangulation.”

Key Findings of the Supreme Court

The prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, which did not conclusively prove guilt.
The alleged confession made by the accused to PW5 was not supported by any other evidence.
The postmortem report was inconclusive, as there were signs of both poisoning and strangulation.
Failure to preserve viscera was a crucial lapse, as it prevented verification of the poisoning claim.
There was no direct evidence linking the accused to the crime.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled:

The appeal was allowed, and the conviction was set aside.
The appellant was acquitted of all charges.
The authorities were directed to release her from custody immediately.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

Importance of Circumstantial Evidence: A conviction cannot be based on incomplete or inconclusive circumstantial evidence.
Burden of Proof on Prosecution: The prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Benefit of the Doubt Principle: If two views are possible, the one favoring the accused should be adopted.
Procedural Lapses: Failure to preserve viscera weakened the prosecution’s case.

Conclusion

This ruling underscores the significance of fair trial principles and ensures that no individual is convicted based on weak or insufficient evidence. The judgment reinforces the need for procedural diligence in criminal cases and upholds the principle that every accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Petitioner Name: Dev Kanya Tiwari
Respondent Name: State of Uttar Pradesh
Judgment By: Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer
Place Of Incident: Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh
Judgment Date: 12-03-2018

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Dev Kanya Tiwari vs State of Uttar Prade Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 12-03-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Judgment by N.V. Ramana
See all petitions in Judgment by S. Abdul Nazeer
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category