Supreme Court Acquits Chandrabhan Sanap: A Detailed Analysis of Circumstantial Evidence


Case Name: Chandrabhan Sanap v. State of Maharashtra.

Citation: 2025 INSC 116 

Date: 28-01-2025

Case Overview

The Supreme Court of India overturned the conviction and death sentence of Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap in a case involving charges of murder, rape, abduction, and robbery. The Court scrutinized the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution and found it insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The High Court of Bombay had previously upheld the death sentence imposed by the Trial Court. The Trial Court had convicted the appellant for offences under Sections 302, 364, 366, 376(2)(m), 376A, 392 read with 397, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Supreme Court's decision rested on the failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Timeline of Events and Initial Investigation

  • The case originated with the discovery of a decomposed body of a 23-year-old woman (referred to as ‘EA’ in the judgment) near a service road in Kanjur Marg.
  • The First Information Report (FIR) was registered at Kanjur Marg Police Station on 16th January 2014.
  • The police conducted an inquest panchnama and spot panchnama.
  • A post-mortem examination was conducted on 17th January 2014. The post-mortem report noted injuries to the external genitals of the deceased.
  • The time of death was estimated to be 8-10 days prior to the post-mortem.
  • The police collected blood samples, grass, and mud from the crime scene with the help of the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL).
  • The police also seized a ring of yellow metal (Article 27).

Key Evidence and Witnesses

  • The prosecution presented CCTV footage purportedly showing the appellant with the deceased at Lokmanya Tilak Terminus (LTT).
  • Several witnesses testified, including a parking attendant (PW-21), a tea stall vendor (PW-18), an AC mechanic (PW-19), and a taxi driver (PW-20) who claimed to have seen the appellant with a woman resembling the victim at LTT.
  • PW-23, a dog walker, claimed to have seen the appellant near the service road with mud on his shoulders.
  • An alleged extra-judicial confession was made to PW-9, a friend of the appellant.
  • The prosecution also presented evidence of a ritual performed by the appellant at Trimbakeshwar Temple (PW-16), where he allegedly confessed to a sin against a woman.
  • A horoscope (Article 28) was found on the appellant at the time of his arrest.
  • The prosecution also presented evidence of recovery of victim’s belongings and a motorcycle allegedly used in the crime.

Issues with Evidence

  • CCTV Footage: The Supreme Court deemed the CCTV footage inadmissible due to non-compliance with Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The court clarified that secondary electronic evidence must be accompanied by a certificate as required by law.
  • Witness Testimonies: The testimonies of key witnesses like PW-20 and PW-21 were found unreliable due to inconsistencies, delayed statements, and the possibility of police influence. The court also noted that the witnesses might have seen photos of the accused before the identification parade.
  • Extra-Judicial Confession: The court deemed the extra-judicial confession to PW-9 as weak and unreliable due to significant omissions, lack of corroboration, and the questionable credibility of PW-9.
  • Recovery of Motorcycle: The recovery of the motorcycle was also found problematic, due to lack of documentation, contradictory evidence, and an incomplete chain of custody.
  • Priest and Horoscope: The evidence related to the appellant's visit to a priest and the horoscope were discarded due to their lack of any nexus with the crime. The priest's register had no systematic record-keeping and the statements were vague.
  • Parallel Investigations: The court noted that multiple units of the Crime Branch conducted parallel investigations without proper legal basis.

Rationale, Reasoning given by the Judges

The Supreme Court overturned the High Court's decision, emphasizing the stringent requirements for establishing guilt based on circumstantial evidence. The court cited Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra, stressing that circumstances "must be" or "should be" established and not merely "may be". The court highlighted the weakness of the circumstantial evidence, observing that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances linking the appellant to the crime. The court also reiterated that the prosecution must prove the accused is guilty, and not merely "suspected" of being guilty.

The court underscored the importance of adherence to Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, regarding electronic records. The court overruled the earlier stance in the Navjot Sandhu case, upholding Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer. It mandated that electronic records presented as evidence must be certified as per the law.

The court further highlighted the unreliability of the witness testimonies, observing inconsistencies, delayed statements, and potential contamination. The judges noted the lack of corroboration for the extra-judicial confession, deeming it a weak piece of evidence. They noted discrepancies between the statements of PW-9 and PW-22, and cited the numerous omissions in PW-9's statement.

The court also found that the prosecution failed to establish the chain of custody for the motorcycle and that key witnesses were not examined, further weakening the prosecution's case. The court also highlighted issues with the recovery of the trolley bag from Nasik, citing a lack of proper procedure and questionable circumstances surrounding its recovery.

The Court reiterated the importance of fair trial procedures especially in death penalty cases. The Court's concern regarding the imposition of the death sentence formed a major part of the reasoning behind its judgement. The court cited Mohd. Arif v. State (NCT) of Delhi and Sundar v. State, emphasizing heightened scrutiny and the need for irrefutable evidence in such cases.

Excerpt, important quotes from the decision

  • "It may be noted here that this Court indicated that the circumstances concerned “must or should” and not “may be” established. There is not only a grammatical but a legal distinction between “may be proved” and “must be or should be proved”..."
  • "An electronic record by way of secondary evidence shall not be admitted in evidence unless the requirements under Section 65-B are complied with."
  • "In cases where the witnesses have had ample opportunity to see the accused before the identification parade is held, it may adversely affect the trial. It is the duty of the prosecution to establish before the court that right from the day of arrest, the accused was kept “baparda”..."
  • "It is a settled principle of law that extra-judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence...where an extra-judicial confession is surrounded by suspicious circumstances, its credibility becomes doubtful..."
  • "However, we are also mindful of the fact that the instant matter involves the death sentence having been awarded."
  • "since the instant matter pertains to award of death sentence, this review petition must be considered in the light of the decision in Anvar P.V. (supra)"
  • “Certainly, it is a primary principle that the accused must be and not merely may be guilty before a court can convict and the mental distance between ‘may be’ and ‘must be’ is long and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions.”
  • "The CCTV footage obtained by the Investigating Agency during the course of investigation and which was put before the trial Court through Prosecution Witness No.31 is the axis of the whole chain of circumstances relied upon by the prosecution.”

Points to Remember

  • Circumstantial Evidence: Guilt based on circumstantial evidence requires a stringent standard of proof. The circumstances should not merely “may be” established, but “must be” or “should be” established.
  • Electronic Evidence: Secondary electronic evidence must comply with Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. A certificate authenticating the record is mandatory for admissibility.
  • Witness Testimony: The reliability of witnesses is critical. Inconsistencies, delayed statements, and possible external influence can undermine the credibility of witness testimonies.
  • Extra-Judicial Confession: Extra-judicial confessions are a weak form of evidence and require independent corroboration. Suspicious circumstances surrounding an extra-judicial confession make its credibility doubtful.
  • Investigative Procedures: Proper procedures in investigations and evidence collection are crucial. Irregularities like parallel investigations and incomplete evidence gathering can adversely impact the case.
  • Burden of Proof: The prosecution bears the burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Mere suspicion is not enough for conviction.
  • Death Penalty Cases: In cases involving the death penalty, the courts must exercise heightened scrutiny and require irrefutable evidence.
  • Test Identification Parades (TIPs): The prosecution should ensure that the accused is kept ‘baparda’ to rule out the possibility of their face being seen by the witnesses before a TIP, especially in cases where they had ample opportunity to see the accused.
  • Fair Trial: The court highlighted the importance of a fair trial, ensuring that the accused is not prejudiced by any procedural lapses and is given opportunity to present the case.

Popular posts from this blog

SARFAESI Act and Civil Court Jurisdiction: A Landmark Judgment

Court: Supreme Court of India Case Name: Central Bank Of India vs. Smt. Prabha Jain Citation: 2025 INSC 95  (Reportable) Background of the Case The Supreme Court of India addressed a series of civil appeals concerning the interplay between the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and the jurisdiction of civil courts. The central issue was whether civil courts can adjudicate on the validity of sale deeds and mortgage deeds when the properties are under SARFAESI Act proceedings. This was particularly in the context where a third party, not the borrower, claimed an independent ownership right over the secured asset. The lead case involved Smt. Prabha Jain, who sought to reclaim her share of family land, arguing that her brother-in-law illegally sold the land which was later mortgaged to the Central Bank of India. The bank argued that the civil court's jurisdiction was barred by Section 34 of the SARFAE...
Read more

Navigating Partnership Disputes in Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Minimal Judicial Intervention, Tasking Arbitral Tribunal to Determine Privity Amidst Partner Succession and a Substitute Presiding Arbitrator Appointment

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay recently addressed a contentious arbitration petition,  2025:BHC-AS:11467 , arising from a dispute concerning the exit of the Petitioner, Darshan Mahendra Nibjya, from a partnership firm where Respondent No. 2, Jayantilal Tarachand Oswal & Ors., subsequently became a partner.  The core legal question revolved around the maintainability of the arbitration against Respondent No. 2, who contended that no arbitration agreement existed between him and the Petitioner. This issue came before the Court in the context of an application for the appointment of a substitute presiding arbitrator, necessitated by the resignation of the previously appointed arbitrator following allegations from Respondent No. 2. The genesis of the matter lies in the inability of the arbitrators nominated by the Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 to agree on a presiding arbitrator, leading to the initial appointment by a Learned Single Judge, an order upheld by the Sup...
Read more

Upholding Governmental Prerogative to Rectify Flawed Recruitment: Supreme Court Settles Assam Forest Constable Appointment Saga

Court: Supreme Court of India. Case Name: STATE OF ASSAM vs. ARABINDA RABHA. Citation: 2025 INSC 334 (Reportable) Background of the Disputed Recruitment The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest & Head of Forest Force, Assam, initiated recruitment for 104 Constable posts in 2014. The selection process involved a physical endurance test followed by interviews, notably without a written examination. A select list was prepared and submitted for government approval. Intervention and Cancellation by the Successor Government A new political regime assumed power in Assam in May 2016. The incumbent PCCF subsequently submitted a note highlighting serious anomalies in the selection process, including disproportionate district-wise representation and reservation policy violations. Based on this note, the Government cancelled the select list in July 2016 without any further inquiry. A fresh advertisement for 132 constable posts was issued in April 2017. High Court's Scrutiny a...
Read more