[ad_1]
The Telangana High Court has acquitted yet another suspect who was sentenced to life imprisonment in a murder case, holding that a trial court cannot convict based solely on an inadmissible confession.
A bench comprising Justices K. Surender and Anil Kumar Jukanti quashed the conviction and life imprisonment of autorickshaw driver Wadde Raju and directed the police to release him immediately. A week ago, the High Court quashed the life imprisonment sentence of a person from Medak district.
In this case, the Family Court-8th Additional Sessions Judge convicted Raju of murdering a woman, Shanthamma, and sentenced him to life imprisonment nine years ago. After being imprisoned, the convict wrote to the High Court (through the jail authorities) to appeal the verdict. The High Court responded to his plea and directed the Legal Services Agency to help him appear before the court.
The LSA has appointed senior advocate Pulimamid Shashidhar Reddy to assist the convict. Advocate Shashidhar Reddy has challenged the conviction, arguing that unless the accused confesses and the investigators produce evidence, there is no evidence to prove the murder charge against Raju. According to the prosecution, the decomposed body of the victim, Shanthamma, was found in Appaipally village in Mahbubnagar district on April 28, 2014.
The body’s decomposition indicated she may have died four weeks earlier. A medical examiner conducted an autopsy and concluded the victim died of a skull fracture. Nearly a month later, investigators arrested Raju and charged him with Shatama’s murder.
They seized a pair of silver anklets from Raju, believed to belong to the victim. The accused’s motorcycle was also seized. Based on Raju’s statement and the items seized, the police filed a charge sheet. The trial court judge convicted the accused based on the evidence of the police officers and the items of the victim seized from the accused.
The court noted that the trial court had placed heavy reliance on Raju’s confession and the jewellery seized from him. The court noted that “confession alone cannot be used to convict”, and said Raju had confessed to the crime in the presence of police officers at the police station. “Such confession is inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act,” the judgement said.
According to the prosecution, the accused confessed to killing several other women and taking away their jewellery.
“The conviction in this case was based on the prosecution’s accusation that the defendant was a serial killer, and the evidence presented by the prosecution was widely inconsistent, implausible and contradictory,” the ruling said.
The only circumstantial evidence provided by the police that could be relied upon was the jewelry seized from the victim. However, the verdict stated that “… during the investigation, it was discovered that the jewelry seized was wrong and clearly fabricated”.
[ad_2]
Source link
