Trial Court Cannot Convict Accused Based on Police Submissions: Telangana HC
![Trial Court Cannot Convict Accused Based on Police Submissions: Telangana HC Trial Court Cannot Convict Accused Based on Police Submissions: Telangana HC](https://www.deccanchronicle.com/h-upload/2024/01/31/1827698-telanganahighcourt.webp)
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court made it clear that trial courts cannot convict an accused on a moral basis and the basis of the confession statement recorded by the police officers, which is inadmissible.
The High Court suggested the trial courts keep in mind the five golden principles —panchsheel — summed up in ‘Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs State of Maharashtra’, to prove a case based on circumstantial evidence.
Finding fault with the trial court for convicting to life imprisonment a projected accused based on the confession statement and tendency of circumstances, a division bench of the High Court comprising Justice K. Surender and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti, set aside the sentence against Wadde Raju of Kodur village in Mahbubnagar district.
The additional sessions judge court of Mahbubnagar had convicted Raju on charges of murder of one Shanthamma for stealing her silver jewellery.
The investigating team projected him as a serial killer and prepared a confession statement of Raju in presence of panches. The police submitted that they had recovered the anklets of Shantamma from Raju after 45 days of the inquest.
Based on the postmortem report, confession statement and recovery of leg anklets from the accused, the trial court sentenced Raju for life.
In the appeal case, the High Court highlighted the blunders committed by the investigating team. In the final report, police submitted that Shantamma’s son identified his mother’s body and other ornaments on the inquest day that was April 29, 2014. But, in the cross examination, the son revealed that he came to know of his mother’s death in Hyderabad on May 7, 2014.
On September 20, 2014, Shantamma’s daughter identified the ornaments of her mother.
The High Court opined that the seizure was found to be incorrect and apparently fabricated during investigation by the police officers. Hence, benefit of the doubt is extended to projected accused and set aside the life imprisonment conviction.