1

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM

PROJECT ON

The Challenge of Understanding Rigor Mortis- A Comparative Study of India, US and

UK

SUBJECT

Evidence

SUBMITTED TO

Dr. Nandini C.P Associate Professor Mam

PROJECT SUBMITTED WITH ROLL NO., SEMESTER AND SECTION

B. Milinda

2018017

Fifth semester

Section A
 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher, Dr.

Nandini C.P Associate Professor madam, who gave me the golden opportunity to do this
wonderful project on the topic “The Challenge of Understanding Rigor Mortis- A
Comparative Study of India, US and UK, which helped me in doing a lot of research and I
came to know about so many new things and I am really thankful to my professor. I have
tried my best to collect information about the project in various possible ways to depict the
clear picture about the given project topic.

B. MILINDA

2018017

SEMESTER V
 3

SYNOPSIS

TITLE:

The Challenge of Understanding Rigor Mortis- A Comparative Study of India, US and UK

INTRODUCTION:

Rigor Mortis refers to the stiffening of the limbs of a corpse. This is caused by the chemical
change in the muscles after death. Because of the skeletal muscles partially contracting, the
muscles are unable to relax and therefore the joints become fixed. The onset of rigor mortis
can vary from 15 minutes to several hours after death, depending on the temperature, body's
condition and other factors. Similarly, the rigor mortis, which is cadaveric rigidity, starts
developing within 1 to 2 hours after death and takes around 12 hours after death for complete
development and remains in the developed stage for further 12 hours and disappears in the
next 12 hours generally. This can give the approximate time since death till 36 hours after
death. e. Rigor mortis is the state of post-mortem stiffening and some shortening of the
muscles of the body, both voluntary and involuntary, following the period of primary
flaccidity. It is due to k chemical changes affecting the proteins of muscles fibres that is
acting and myosin. This is sign of the end of cellular life of the muscles.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

A. Subject Matter:

Rigor mortis appears approximately 2 hours after death in the muscles of the face,
progresses to the limbs over the next few hours, completing between 6 to 8 hours after
death. Rigor mortis then stays for another 12 hours (till 24 hours after death) and then
starts disappearing.

B. Location / Area:

India, US and UK.

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this study is to compare the understanding rigor mortis in India, US, UK
and discuss the evidentiary value of rigor mortis.
 4

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

1. Whether rigor mortis can be taken as evidence ?

2. Whether only by seeing the rigor mortis can a accused be punished ?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Nature of the Study:

The nature of the Study is doctrinal. It also entails Analytical, Critical and descriptive studies.

Sources of the Study:

a. Primary Sources:

Indian Evidence Act of 1872, Journals, Civil Procedure Code of 1908, Criminal
Procedure Code of 1973, Judgments of various High Courts and Supreme Court.

b. Secondary Sources:

Ratanlal and Dhirajlal Law of Evidence; Woodroffe and Amir Ali’s Law of Evidence;
Sarkar’s Law of Evidence.

c. Mode of Citation:

Bluebook 20th Edition.

LITERATURE REVIEW:

1. H.A.Shapiro, (M.D., Ph.D, F.R.S.S.AF) “ RIGOR MORTIS” The British

Medical Journal Vol.2, No.4673 ( July 29,1950),P.304

The author , via this article, elucidated why rigor is first seen in such a small joint as the
temporo-Mandibular joint and he observed that there is no true rigor in the finger- joints
themselves can be obtained by flexion or extension of a wrist. Joint involved in rigor, when it
will be seen that the corresponding appropriate flexions and extensions of the finger joints. It
seems that the fingers and the toes is dependent upon involvement of muscles at a distance
from those members and that there is no true rigor mortis of the fingers and toe joints
themselves. And finally, he concluded that if the hypothesis advanced to explain these
observations is more in keeping with the facts observed, it is obvious that a still more limited
reliance then is already the case at present must be placed upon data dependent upon
 5

distribution of rigor mortis in a dead body for the purpose of estimating the early post-
mortem interval.

2. Heinrich Hildebrand ( Translated from the German by Alfred W.Herzog) “

RIGOR MORTIS AND CATALEPTIC RIGOR MORTIS” Medico-Legal
Journal, Vol. 46, Issues 5-6 (September, October, November and December
1929), pp. 111

In this article the author has explained cataleptic rigor mortis and rigor mortis with full of
examples and he also said that undoubtedly there is considerable similarity and relation
between muscular contractions during life and in rigor mortis. Generally, the whole body is
stiff after six to nine hours. In one case a disinterred body was found in which rigor mortis
had persisted for nine weeks in another case for a year. After rigor mortis has fully developed
it does not reappear if it is forcibly destroyed. If for example, one finds rigor mortis on the
torso and arms, but not in the legs, death has occurred less than twelve hours before; if how-
ever rigor mortis is found in the legs but not in the torso or arms, the body has been dead
about three days. Finally, he concluded with in these cases proves that although cataleptic
rigor mortis or cataleptic rigidity may not occur very frequently, sometimes it does occur.

3. William Minor, Deyerle ‘ LEGAL MORTIS’ Insurance Counsel Journal, Vol.

24, Issue 3 (July, 1957), pp. 290

The author, via this article, elucidated that a method of quoting directly in one’s progress
notes and reports help clarify other manifestations of “legal mortis”. As an example, the
physician is not infrequently confronted with a patient under his care who has previously
made no reference to an on-the-job injury or other litigious condition during the course of the
treatment. Another aura of ‘ legal mortis’ that often precedes the patient’s visit is a large file
of medical reports. He finally concluded that the physician can cope with “ legal mortis” in a
more equitable manner if he does not allow himself to be labelled a plaintiff’s Doctor or
Defendant’s doctor.

4. W.R.L.James and B.H.Knight “ Errors in estimating time since death ”

Medicine, Science and the Law, Vol. 5, Issue 2 (April 1965), pp. 111

The author, via this article, elucidated that after a painstaking study Marshall and Hoare
recorded their errors in assessing body cooling by a mathematical method, the bodies being
kept in a nearly constant environment and the writing of this present paper reports the size
 6

and frequency of the errors in assessing time since death in a series of 110 bodies all of which
had been exposed to changed environment the calculations were simple and the only
equipment used was an ordinary chemical thermometer and finally concluded that the first
100 were assessed by a simple empirical method and the errors are recorded and analysed.
Another ten bodies were assessed by the same simple method and by a more complex
procedure. It is suggested that research into the effect of clothing on body cooling might well
lead to improvement in estimating time since death.

5. A.Keith Mant “ sudden death due to Acute sickling” Medicine, Science and the
Law, Vol. 7, Issue 3 (July 1967), pp. 135

In this the author has taken a case and explained the whole case which is related to sicklaemia
disease its presence provides protection against malignant tertian malaria, but may also cause
acute capillary stasis and death, should the subject become anoxic, or exposed to physical or
emotional stress. Although an unusual cause of death, acute fatal sickling may occur in
apparently healthy coloured males during periods of sudden exertion, such as fisticuffs, so
giving rise to suspicion of homicide. Cases of this kind are widely recognised in the US. It is
believed that this is the first case of its kind to have occurred in this country during a criminal
act.

B.MILINDA
2018017
 7

INTRODUCTION:

Estimating the time gap in between death and autopsy is an important aspect of every
medico-legal case after death. Determination of approximate time since death is important in
all the unnatural cases and criminal cases which include homicide, accidents, and suicide
cases .Development of. Rigor Mortis is based upon different physical and chemical changes
known to occur within the dead body. The term Rigor mortis is a Latin origin word which
means stiffness of death. It is one of the identifiable signs of death, which is characterized by
stiffening of the muscles of the body caused by chemical changes that occur in muscle post-
mortem. The primary reason for the development of rigor mortis is the loss of adenosine
triphosphate from the anoxic tissue. Rigor mortis starts to develop 2–4 hours after death and
develops fully by 6 to 12 hours and gradually dissipates until approximately 72 hours after
death. It has been found that post-mortem muscle proteolysis is responsible for the relaxation
following rigor mortis. The onset of Rigor Mortis after death depends on the surrounding
temperature. The biochemical changes that take place in the dead body is chemical
breakdown of energy molecules i.e.; ATP in the muscles, which is the source of energy
required for activity. In absence of ATP, myosin molecules adhere to actin filaments and the
muscles become firm, hard and rigid. Various factors affecting the process of Rigor Mortis
are age and condition of the body, mode of death, surroundings, various environmental
condition have an effect on the development and disappearance of rigor mortis like in various
tropical and temperate zones . Work regarding the appearance, duration and disappearance of
stiffness in various muscles in a cadaver has been extensively carried out both in India and
abroad by many researchers. These researchers have conducted this study for assessing the
time of death from the onset and time span of Rigor Mortis which rely on many factors
including weather. India is having diverse weather conditions that exist throughout its
various parts at a given time. Haryana is one such place in North India which experiences
extremes of weather conditions. The factors that interfere with the onset and duration of rigor
mortis are temperature, existing antemortem pathologies, age, body muscular mass, presence
of infections, temperature, climatic conditions and the degree of muscular activity
immediately before death.
 8

Rigor Mortis in India

1
In India, the inquest is carried out by the police, or the magistrate, or both. It is uncommon
for a medical expert to be visiting the scene of crime. Most of the information gathered by the
autopsy surgeon, prior to autopsy, is by the police. However, there are rare situations where
the police will request the forensic experts to visit the scene of death. There is also practice of
providing photographs of the scene of death, whenever necessary, to the autopsy surgeon, as
was done in the cases. Rigor mortis is a post mortem change which is better appreciated by
touch than by seeing the photographs. Rigor mortis is usually measured manually by
attempting to flex or extend each joint during autopsy. Rigor mortis follows primary
relaxation of the muscles; it is easily possible to change the position of body parts during this
period, after which the position remains stable till the rigor mortis disappears. If the position
of the dead body during the primary relaxation is unusual with flexion at some major joints, it
will remain rigidly in the same position during the stage of rigor mortis. If the rigor mortis is
the well-established stage, the flexed limbs continue to stay flexed and will defy gravity, even
when the support beneath them is missing. Unusual position in which the limbs are stiff and
defy gravity could be due to putrefaction as well. Stiffness due to rigor mortis can be
differentiated from stiffness due to putrefaction. Dead bodies with moderate or advanced
putrefaction will no longer have rigor mortis.

Case laws:

2
1. R v Wickens

Citation: [2003] EWCA Crim 2196, [2003] All ER (D) 208 (Jun)

Court: England and wales court of Appeal, criminal Division.

Judgment date: 17-06-2003

Facts:

The victim was found dead at home when a neighbour called the fire brigade to attend to a
fire in another part of her bungalow. Fire fighters found the beginnings of rigor mortis and
1
Kanchan T, Rastogi P, Menezes RG, Nagesh KR. Apparent Partial Hanging. Am J Forensic Med Pathol.
2010;31:376–7, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3657962/
2
R v Wickens., [2003] EWCA Crim 2196, [2003] All ER (D) 208 (Jun)
 9

the police pathologist who examined the body shortly afterwards recorded that full rigor
mortis had set in. The defendant was charged with murder on the basis of witness evidence
from two of his ex-wives that he had confessed to the murder. The first ex-wife’s account
was that the defendant had arrived at her house on the day before the body was found,
covered in blood, and had given an account that he had committed the murder during the
night, two days before the body was found.

Issue:

Whether it was possible to give an estimate of the time of the onset of rigor mortis?

Arguments:

1. The defendant’s case was that he was not responsible for the victim’s death. He
sought to discredit the confession evidence on the basis that the first witness’s account
was wrong because the victim had died on the day before the body had been found.
The defendant relied on evidence that the victim was wearing ‘day’ clothes and had a
part prepared meal in the kitchen.
2. The pathologist was the only medical expert called at trial and he gave evidence that it
was not possible to give an estimate of the time of the onset of rigor mortis and the
victim’s death although it was more likely that full rigor mortis would take place
between 12 and 24 hours after death.

The defendant was convicted and his application against conviction to the Court of
Appeal was unsuccessful.

Observation:

The Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the defendant’s case back to the Court of
Appeal on the basis that the police had failed to disclose a telephone conversation between
the pathologist and a police officer and an internal request form which gave time estimates of
rigor mortis from which the time of death could be inferred. The Court of Appeal heard
evidence from the pathologist and a new medical expert on rigor mortis. The pathologist’s
opinion evidence was that normally full rigor mortis took between 12 and 24 hours depending
on the temperature of the body, age and frailty and muscle tone of the body. He further gave
his opinion that it was possible, but extremely unlikely, that rigor mortis occurred two days
earlier. The new expert gave similar evidence and his opinion was that it was unlikely that the
death had been two days earlier.
 10

Judgment:

The appeal would be allowed. There had been no material non-disclosure in the instant case
because

(i) the Crown was not required to disclose its internal request form which was only a
police officer’s estimate of the case; and
(ii) (ii) the record of the telephone conversation stated a slightly later time estimate of
rigor mortis that was in fact less favourable to the defendant; and the comments
relating to the time of death appeared to have been interpretation by the police
officer, not the pathologist. In contrast, the opinion evidence of the medical
experts that it was extremely unlikely that the victim would have been killed two
days prior to the date that her body was found, was not been equivalent to the
neutral manner of the forensic evidence at trial. In those circumstances, it was not
possible to be sure that the outcome of the defendant’s trial would have been the
same had the jury heard that evidence. Accordingly, the defendant’s conviction
would be quashed.

3
2. R v Puaca

Citation: [2005] EWCA Crim 3001, [2005] All ER (D) 333 (Nov)

Court: England and wales court of Appeal, criminal Division.

Judgment Date: 24-11-2005

Facts:

The defendant was arrested and charged with the murder of a woman with whom he
shared a flat. The victim had abused both prescription drugs and alcohol, and the post-
mortem toxicological evidence showed that she had ingested alcohol, amitriptyline,
dothiepin, dihydrocodeine, codeine and probably diazepam.

Issue:

Whether pathologist final report can be considered as a evidence to convict a person ?

3
R v Puaca., [2005] EWCA Crim 3001, [2005] All ER (D) 333 (Nov)
 11

Arguments of prosecution side :

i. The prosecution case was that, at some point during the preceding night, the
defendant had smothered the victim by pressing her face into the bedclothes so that
she could not breathe.

Arguments of defendant side:

i. The defendant’s case was that he had gone to sleep, had woken briefly to go to the
lavatory, and had found the victim asleep. The next morning, he found her dead.

Observation:

The defendant’s case was that he had gone to sleep, had woken briefly to go to the lavatory,
and had found the victim asleep. The next morning, he found her dead. The issue of cause of
death turned largely on the pathological evidence. To establish smothering, the prosecution
relied upon the evidence of a witness who had conducted the first post-mortem examination
(the prosecution expert). At trial, two possible causes of death were identified for the jury: the
prosecution expert stated that the victim had been smothered whilst on her bed; the defence
advanced the possibility of an overdose of drugs. The prosecution expert had, in his post-
mortem report, concluded (without having had access to the report of the forensic toxicologist
or GP or other medical records) that death had been caused by asphyxia due to upper airway
obstruction. He stated that ‘tearing and haemorrhaging within the muscles of the scapulae
(the infraspinatus muscles (in the shoulder)) were consistent with having been caused during
forceful movement of the upper limbs during upper airway obstruction’. He subsequently
gave evidence that the victim had tried to push up, and that in doing so she had suffered the
muscle injury. He gave no reasons for his conclusion and averted to no other possible cause.
On a number of occasions during his evidence, he gave evidence that various findings were
consistent with, or were signs of, ‘asphyxia’. However, during his re-examination he stated
that the findings were consistent also with the cause of death being an overdose.

Lower court:

The defendant was convicted of murder. He appealed against conviction. He submitted that
fresh evidence from five further pathologists supported the defence experts’ views. Those
pathologists would not have given suffocation as the cause of death, and they strongly
challenged a number of matters on which the prosecution expert relied in order to reach his
conclusion.
 12

Judgment:

The appeal would be allowed. A review of the development and bases of the expert’s views
and evidence established first that his conclusions were not founded in such a way that they
could be safely relied on by the jury, and second, that the way that his evidence had been
presented, the points which he had made, and the manner of making them, might well have
caused the jury to have given inappropriate weight to aspects of his evidence. Accordingly,
the conviction was unsafe.

(i) A post-mortem report fulfilled a number of functions. It would guide the police in
their investigations. It was likely that it would be considered in pre-trial proceedings
and applications, such as an application for bail or legal assistance. An expert witness
should state the facts or assumption on which his opinion was based, and should not
omit to consider material facts which would detract from his concluded opinion.
There was also a need in certain cases to refer to ante-mortem records. The instant,
unusual, case had called for a properly reasoned post-mortem report.
(ii) Whereas ‘inconsistency’ was often probative, the fact of consistency was quite often
of no probative value at all. In the instant case, the evidence of consistency had no
probative value (assuming the correctness of the prosecution expert’s answer in re-
examination). There was a very real danger of adducing before a jury in such a case
evidence of matters which were ‘consistent’ with a conclusion, unless it was made
very clear to them that such matters did not help them to reach the conclusion. The
conviction would be quashed.
4
3. Baso Prasad & Ors vs State Of Bihar

CITATION :

LNIND 2006 SC 1367

CASE NO.:

Appeal (crl.) 1169-1170 of 2005

PETITIONER:

Baso Prasad & Ors.

4
Baso Prasad & Ors vs State Of Bihar.,LNIND 2006 SC 1367
 13

RESPONDENT:

State of Bihar

BENCH:

S.B. Sinha & Markandey Katju

FACTS:

On 13.12.1999 at about 06.30 a.m., the deceased was milking a buffalo. His other family
members including the wife of his brother (informant Krishna Deo Prasad-PW-7), nephew
Sunil Prasad and others were brushing their teeth at the roof of their house. Brijnandan Prasad
and others have their joint residential house at some distance from the house of the deceased.
They allegedly came over the roof of their house armed with rifles and started brick-batting
and abusing the brother of the informant alleging that they had burnt a heap of straw
belonging to them. When Shivnandan Prasad went to the roof of the house, allegedly the
appellants started firing. One of the bullets hit Shivnandan Prasad on his chest. An alarm was
raised. The first informant reached near his brother and found him dead. A First Information
Report was lodged at about 10.00 a.m. on the same day before Chandi Police Station. The
distance between the place of occurrence and the Chandi Police Station is said to be about 10
k.m.

SESSIONS JUDGE HELD:

The learned Sessions Judge relying on or on the basis of the evidence adduced by the
prosecution and in particular the deposition of the eye- witnesses found the appellants guilty
of commission of an offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced
them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. A fine of Rs.5,000/- was also imposed upon
each of them. They were also found guilty under Section 27 of the Arms Act and were
convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The appeals preferred by the
appellants have been dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court.

ARGUMENTS:

Mr. Nagendra Rai, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants,
would raise the following contentions in support of the appeals.

1) The prosecution version on the basis whereof the judgment of conviction and sentence has
been arrived, at is improbable and the same is falsified by medical evidence.
 14

2) If the occurrence had taken place in the morning, as alleged by the prosecution, the post-
mortem examination having been conducted at 03.00 p.m. on the same day, it was not
possible to find presence of rigour mortis in all the four limbs and furthermore keeping in
view the distance from which the firing had taken place, the doctor would not have found
margin of wound having been charred.

3) The manner in which the incident took place as disclosed by the prosecution having been
prevaricated from stage to stage should not be relied upon, inasmuch as in the First
Information Report it was alleged that three persons fired, whereas in the statements made
under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the witnesses attributed firing to all the
accused, whereas in evidence some of the witnesses attributed the act of firing only on the
Brijnandan Prasad.

4) The investigation was perfunctory, as no blood was found at the spot; no gun was
recovered; no sign of firing was noticed.

5) It is improbable that although there had been indiscriminate firing, nobody else would
have suffered any injury.

6) Even if the occurrence had taken place, it was only Brijnandan Prasad who had fired and,
thus, participation of others having common intention to commit the said offence has not
been proved.

Mr. Gopal Singh, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of
Bihar, on the other hand, would submit :

1) At the place of occurrence blood was seized, which has been proved by some of the eye-
witnesses as also PW-2.

2) The witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution has further proved that the appellants
had indulged in brick batting.

3) The firing by the appellants and in particular Brijnandan Prasad has categorically been
stated by all the witnesses.

Before adverting to the rival contentions, as noticed hereinbefore, we may notice that on the
same day, the brother of the appellants Bhuvan Mahto was said to have been done to death
wherefor a First Information Report was lodged in which the first informant and the deceased
were said to be the accused, but it is accepted that in the said case also being Chandi P.S.
 15

Case No. 374 of 1999, a charge-sheet has been filed wherein also the appellants have been
made accused and not the informant or the deceased.

OBSERVATION;

The homicidal nature of the death of the deceased is not in dispute. The autopsy report of Dr.
Prabhat Keshaw corroborates the homicidal nature of death. In his deposition, he stated:

Rigour mortis present in all four limbs.

Injury No. (i) One lacerated wound on occipital region on scalp 1 1/2" x 1" x scalp deep.

(ii) One lacerated wound on right side of chest at the length of second inter-coastal space 1
1/2" lateral to the external margin 2" x 1" x cavity deep size, margin of wound charred and
inverted, wound of entry.

(iii) Third rib fractured.

(iv) One lacerated wound on left side of back at bare area, just below the lower the lower
border of scapula 1 1/2" x 1" x cavity deep size, margin of wound everted, wound of exit.
Both injury No. II & IV are inter connected with each other.

The start of rigour mortis depends on the temperature and weather conditions, but in this case
rigour mortis developed after three hours. In all turn limbs developing of rigour mortis take
18 hours in such types of cases.

We, therefore, are of the opinion that the second contention of the learned Counsel also
cannot be accepted. We, however, are not oblivious of one patent fact. In the First
Information Report, the first informant, attributed the act of firing to Brijnandan Prasad and
Sahdeo. PW-4, however, in his deposition before the court attributed the act of firing only to
Brijnandan Prasad. According to him, other persons were only wielding rifles. Shivnandan
Prasad fell down after receiving the gunshot and died. He in his cross-examination also
attributed the act of firing only to Brijnandan Prasad. PW-5 although stated that all the
accused had started firing but even according to her Brijnandan Prasad fired shot which had
hit the deceased on his chest. Evidence of PW-6 is also to the same effect that the shot which
had hit his father on the chest was fired by Brijnandan Prasad. PW-7 and PW-8 also named
Brijnandan Prasad.
 16

JUDGMENT:

We, therefore, are of the opinion that the second contention of the learned Counsel also
cannot be accepted. We, however, are not oblivious of one patent fact. The prosecution case
is that the dispute started on lighting of fire on a heap of straw. The accused allegedly hurled
brick bats, which compelled the deceased to come to the roof to forbid them from doing so.
Whereas Brijnandan Prasad alone fired a shot which had hit the deceased, there is no
evidence brought on record to show that any other accused did so. No gun shot injury was
suffered by any person. The deceased has also suffered only one gunshot injury. No sign of
firing was found on the walls or any other part of the building. No cartridge was recovered.
Even no other person had suffered any injury by reason of hurling of brick bats. Having
regard to the materials brought on records, we are of the opinion that in this case although the
prosecution has proved the charge of committing the murder of the deceased, it has failed to
establish that the accused had any common intention in relation thereto. Brijnandan Prasad
alone was, thus, responsible therefore. Had the other accused shared common intention with
Brijnandan Prasad, they would have also fired. No such evidence having been brought on
record; benefit of doubt must be extended to the other accused persons. We, therefore, while
holding Brijnandan Prasad guilty, are inclined to allow the appeal of the other appellants. The
judgment of conviction and sentence passed against them is set aside. The appellants in
Criminal Appeal No. 1169 of 2005 shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other
case. Criminal Appeal No. 1169 of 2005 is, therefore, allowed and Criminal Appeal No. 1170
of 2005 filed by Brijnandan Prasad is dismissed.

5
4. Umesh Singh vs. State of Bihar

CITATION: (22.03.2013 - SC) MANU/SC/0276/2013

HON’BLE JUDGES: C.K. Prasad and V. Gopala Gowda, JJ.

FACTS:

The deceased Shailendra Kumar was murdered on 16.07.1996 at about 3:30 p.m. by the
Appellant Umesh Singh and other persons, namely, Awadhesh Singh, Sudhir Singh, Jaddu
Singh, Nawal Singh, Binda Singh @ Bindeshwari Singh by shooting him with a revolver and
rifle with a criminal intention for unlawful purpose in furtherance of common intention along
5
Umesh Singh vs. State of Bihar., MANU/SC/0276/2013
 17

with other accused and to have in their possession of fire arms with an intention to use it for
an unlawful purpose to commit murder of Shailendra Kumar along with accused Nos. 5 & 6
and another accused Moti Singh who is dead. They were charged Under Section 302 read
with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased along
with his cousin brother Arvind Kumar- PW2 were going to Tungi for catching a bus for
Kothar on 16.7.96 at about 3:30 p.m. When they proceeded at a distance ahead of Tungi High
School near Latawar Payeen, the accused persons named above surrounded them. The
deceased accused Moti Singh is alleged to have exhorted his other associates to shoot the
deceased Shailendra Kumar upon which the Appellant herein took out a country made
revolver and pumped its bullets in the temple of the deceased and accused No. 2 who was
having a rifle in his hand fired in the abdomen of the deceased. Accused No. 4 also shot a fire
causing injury in the leg of the deceased while accused No. 3 also fired from his rifle.
Accused No. 5 was also having a rifle and he threw the dead body of the deceased in the
Payeen. It is also the case of the prosecution that during the course of the occurrence of the
incident the informant PW2 Arvind Kumar was kept over-powered by the deceased accused
Moti Singh and Jaddu Singh and after accomplishing the target, they left. Further, the
witnesses whose names were found in the fardbeyan claimed to have seen the occurrence of
the incident. The fardbeyan was recorded by ASI RS Singh at about 7:00 p.m. on the same
date at Tungi High School hostel, Latawar Payeen and the inquest report of the dead body
was also prepared at the place of occurrence itself at 7:10 p.m. Seizure list of certain
incriminating items including empty fired cartridges which were recovered from the spot was
also prepared. Formal FIR was recorded and investigation was taken up by the police. On
concluding the investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet before the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate on the basis of which cognizance was taken by him and the case was
committed to the Court of Sessions.

ISSUE:

whether this Court is required to interfere with the concurrent finding of fact recorded in
affirming the conviction and sentence imposed against the Appellant.

Ratio Decidendi:

"Between medical and ocular evidence, ocular evidence shall be preferred to hold charge
proved."

TRIAL COURT:
 18

The learned Sessions Judge on his turn transferred the case to the file of Second Additional
Sessions Judge, Nawadah and the charges were framed for the offence Under Section 302
read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The accused
pleaded not guilty. The case went for trial and the prosecution has examined the witnesses
PW1 to PW9 and two witnesses were examined in support of the defence. The learned
Additional Sessions Judge on appraisal of the evidence and record passed the judgment dated
04.04.1998 imposing the conviction and sentence against the accused persons Under Section
302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and Under Section 27 of the Arms Act and
awarded sentence of imprisonment for life Under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian
Penal Code. The sentence awarded regarding the conviction under different heads of charges
ordered were to run concurrently. The conviction and sentence passed by the Additional
Sessions Judge was challenged by the accused in the appeals referred to supra before the
High Court of Patna.

HIGH COURT:

The High Court after hearing all the accused/Appellants passed the common judgment
affirming the conviction and sentence in relation to the present Appellant and set aside the
conviction and sentence in so far as Awadhesh Singh, Jaddu Singh and Nawal Singh who
were held to be not found guilty of the charges Under Section 302 read with Section 34,
Indian Penal Code, i.e. in the appeal Nos. 241/98 and 247/98. However, as far as the present
Appellant and Ors. are concerned, the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge was affirmed. During pendency of the appeals the accused by name, Moti Singh died
and his appeal got abated.

ARGUMENTS BASED UPON HIGH COURT JUDGMENT:

1. The Appellant has questioned the correctness of the findings recorded in the
impugned judgment by the High Court in affirming the conviction and sentence
awarded against him along with others. Mr. Amarendra Sharan, learned senior
Counsel appearing for the Appellant contends that the High Court has failed to notice
the discrepancies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, it could have
disbelieved the same but it has affirmed the conviction and sentence on this
Appellant.
2. Further, even according to its own findings there were no eye-witnesses to the
occurrence of the incident as the PWs arrived at the scene of occurrence 15-20
 19

minutes after the incident and the informant who was present at the spot has given
different version in the evidence and the FIR regarding the role of the Appellant. The
statement of PW2 Arvind Kumar who is the cousin brother of the deceased is the
basis on which the FIR was registered and the Investigation of the case was made by
the Investigating Officer. The PW2 was present at the time of occurrence and on the
basis of his statement, the accused persons have been falsely implicated in treating his
statement as FIR, the same is belated FIR which is not admissible in law and also hit
by Section 162, Code of Criminal Procedure. In support of this contention he has
placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in State of A.P. v. Punati Ramulu
MANU/SC/0417/1993 (1994) Supp. 1 SCC 590.
3. It was further contended by the learned senior Counsel that the earlier information
given by PW4 to the police was suppressed and by that time PW9- I.O. had reached
the scene of occurrence, the other police officer and S.P. of the District were very
much present there. They were not examined in the case to prove the prosecution case
against the accused.
4. The learned senior Counsel for the Appellant further contended that not recording the
information furnished by PW4 to the police as FIR but treating PW2 information as
FIR in the case though it is hit by Section 162, Code of Criminal Procedure creates
doubt in the prosecution case and therefore benefit of doubt must be given to the
accused by the trial court and the High Court.
5. Therefore, the learned senior Counsel submits that the concurrent finding of fact on
the charge recorded by the High Court against this Appellant is erroneous and vitiated
in law which is liable to be set aside and he may be acquitted of the charges levelled
against him and he may be set at liberty by allowing this appeal.

learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State:

1. On the other hand, Mr. Chandan Kumar, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
the State sought to justify the finding and reasons recorded in the impugned judgment,
inter alia, contending that the High Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction has
examined the correctness of the findings and reasons recorded by the learned Sessions
Judge on the charges framed against the Appellant and on proper appraisal of the
same, it has affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed against the Appellant
which is based on proper re-appreciation of evidence on record. The same is
supported with valid and cogent reasons. Learned Counsel further sought to justify
 20

registration of FIR on the basis of the information furnished by PW2 which is in

conformity with the decision of this Court in Binay Kumar v. State of Bihar
MANU/SC/0088/1997 : (1997) 1 SCC 283
2. The learned Counsel further submits that the dispute regarding the place of incident as
contended by the learned Counsel for the Appellant is factually not correct. In view of
the concurrent finding of the High Court regarding the place of occurrence is very
much certain as it is said to be at Tungi. PW4 Ashok Kumar Singh in his evidence has
categorically stated that he is not an eye-witness but on the basis of hearsay he has
informed the police. The I.O. has further stated in his evidence that PW4 is a hearsay
witness and therefore his information could not have been treated as FIR. Hence he
has requested this Court that there is no merit in this appeal, particularly, having
regard to the concurrent finding on the charge by the High Court on proper
appreciation of legal evidence and record and affirming the conviction and sentence
for charge Under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. Hence, the
learned senior Counsel has requested this Court not to interfere with the same in
exercise of its jurisdiction.

OBSERVATION:

The findings and decision recorded and rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge
after thorough discussion and on proper appreciation of evidence on record held that the
doctor has opined that rigor mortis starts within 1 to 3 hours and vanishes after 36 hours. The
said opinion of the medical officer PW8 regarding complete vanishing of rigor mortis from
the dead body after 36 hours is medically not correct and this may be lack of his knowledge
on the subject and he was liberal to the cross-examination by the defence lawyer. Further the
learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly referred to Medical Jurisprudence Digest
written by B.L. Bansal Advocate, (1996 Edition at page 422), which clearly mentions that the
rigor mortis persists from 12 to 24 hours and then passes off but it means that the faster the
rigor mortis appears, the shorter time it persists. Therefore, the learned Additional Sessions
Judge has held that broadly speaking the faster the rigor mortis appears, the shorter the time it
persists and further has rightly made observation that rigor mortis will be present in some
parts of legs of the dead body. According to the medical officer PW8 there is no question of
the time of death of the deceased. It must have preceded more than 24 hours which is the
maximum limit for disappearance of rigor mortis. The said view of the medical officer PW8
was found fault with by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and held that he has not
 21

correctly deposed in his cross-examination regarding the time lapse of a dead person. He has
extended the time for rigor mortis to be 30 to 36 hours and further rightly held that PW8 the
medical officer, has deposed in his evidence contrary to the rule of medical jurisprudence.
Therefore, the learned Additional Session Judge has rightly held in the impugned judgment
the same cannot be the basis for the defence to acquit the accused. The claim by the
Appellant that the deceased has been killed in the early morning of 16.07.1996 and the
allegation that the accused has been falsely implicated in the case has been rightly rejected by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge and the same has been concurred with by the High
Court by assigning the valid and cogent reasons in the impugned judgment. Rightly, the
learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State has placed reliance upon the judgment of
this Court referred to supra that between medical and ocular evidence the ocular evidence
must be preferred to hold the charge proved. This is the correct legal position as held by both
the learned Additional Sessions Judge as well as the High Court after placing reliance upon
the statement of evidence of PW2, PW3, PW5 and PW7. Therefore, we do not find any
erroneous reasoning on this aspect of the matter. There is no substance in submissions of the
learned senior Counsel on the above aspect of the matter with reference to judgments of this
Court referred to supra which decisions have absolutely no application to the fact’s situation
of the case on hand.

JUDGMENT:

In view of the concurrent findings by the High Court as well as the learned Additional
Sessions Judge and an order of conviction and sentence imposed against the Appellant herein
is on the basis of legal evidence on record and on proper appreciation of the same. Therefore,
the same is not erroneous in law as the finding is supported with valid and cogent reasons.
For the foregoing reasons the impugned judgment and order cannot be interfered with by this
Court. Hence, the appeal is devoid of merit and accordingly it is dismissed.

6
5. Ramreddy Rajeshkhanna Reddy and Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

CITATION: MANU/SC/8070/2006

HON’BLE JUDGES: S.B. Sinha and P.P. Naolekar, JJ.

FACTS:

Ramreddy Rajeshkhanna Reddy and Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh,

6

MANU/SC/8070/2006
 22

The said offence was said to have been committed during the period between 10.30 p.m. of
14.6.1998 to 5.00 a.m. on 15.6.1998. The deceased was a motor mechanic. He and the
Appellant No. 1 herein were friends. The Appellant No. 2 and two other accused were said to
be his followers. A quarrel allegedly took place between the deceased on the one side and the
Appellants on the other at about 9 p.m. on the said date near a theatre known as Durga
Talkies in the town of Kothagudem. The quarrel, according to P.W.8-Routu Narender, who
was himself a jeep driver and parked his vehicle near the afore-mentioned theatre, was on two
counts: (1) the jeep of the Appellant No. 1 had not been satisfactorily repaired by the
deceased, although he had taken repair charges in respect thereof; and (2) the deceased was
visiting a woman called Gugloth Dasli, who was said to be his concubine, upon being
questioned in that behalf by the first appellant, the deceased, allegedly, retorted that he had
been paying money to the said Dasli and, therefore, no one could stop him from visiting her,
whereupon he was allegedly threatened. The parties exchanged hot words but P.W.8-Routu
Narender and others are said to have intervened. The deceased thereafter left for his residence
in an auto. According to the prosecution, at about 10.30 p.m. on the same night, the Appellant
No. 1 went to the house of the deceased and called him on the ground that his jeep required
some repairs. P.W.1-Md. Anwar Khan, the elder brother of the deceased was said to be
present. He came out with him from the residence and allegedly saw the Appellant No. 1 on
the road. He stated that on the body of auto the word 'Swathi' was inscribed. He furthermore,
is said to have noticed the other two Appellants, i.e., Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 standing by its
side. The deceased and the Appellants herein are said to have walked away. At about 5.00
a.m. in the next morning, P.W.2-Mohd. Mohamood Khan, another brother of the deceased
returned home from his workshop. Upon an inquiry having been made as to whether the
deceased had visited the workshop on the previous night along with the Appellant, he
answered in the negative. The dead body was noticed by P.W.4-A. Venkateswarlu in the
morning in front of his house. As the deceased was known to P.W.4, he went to P.W.1 and
informed thereabout. They came to the spot whereafter P.W.1 rushed to the town police
station of Kothagudem Town. He, however, did not enter the police station. He was standing
on the road before the police station. P.W.5-J. Srinivas, at about 6.00 a.m., was passing by the
said police station for shopping, P.W.1 requested him to scribe a report on his behalf
describing the incident.

TRIAL COURT:
 23

The Appellant No. 1 herein along with one Shaik Abdul Rahman, accused No. 3 were
convicted for commission of an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code (IPC) and Appellant No. 2 herein was convicted under Section 302 IPC. They
were prosecuted for committing murder of one Mohammad Rafiq Khan on 14.6.1998.

HIGH COURT:

The High Court, however, upheld the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the
learned Sessions Judge holding that the Appellants quarrelled with the deceased and thus,
motive is proved which was witnessed by P.W.8.

ARGUMENTS BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT:

1. Mr. R.P. Gupta, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants
took us through the depositions of the prosecution witnesses and submitted that
having regard to the discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses, it cannot be said
that guilt of the accused has been proved beyond all reasonable doubts. The learned
Counsel has drawn our attention to Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology,
22nd Edition page 235 for the proposition that it is difficult to determine exact time of
the death and as no reason has been assigned by the autopsy surgeon as to on what
basis he had formed his opinion as regards the time of death, the same was not
reliable. The learned Counsel urged that although as stated in the First Information
Report the auto in which the Appellants are said to have come to the residence of the
deceased, bore the inscription "Swathi", it was found that the same contained the
inscription "Suverna".
2. It was submitted that the judgments of conviction and sentence passed by the learned
Sessions Judge and the High Court cannot be sustained as:
(i) P.W.1 having not met P.W.8 before lodging the FIR, there was no way he could
learn about the purported quarrel between the Appellants and the deceased near the
said Durga Talkies;

(ii) Recovery of the knife purported to be on the basis of the confession made by the
Appellant No. 2 could not have led to conviction of the other Appellants; and

(iii) A part of the motive, i.e., dispute as regard a woman having been disbelieved even by
the trial court, as she, despite having been cited as a witness in the charge sheet, was not
 24

examined, the link in the chain to point to the guilt of the Appellants cannot be said to
have been established.

ARGUMENTS BEHALF OF THE STATE:

1. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, on the other hand, supported the
impugned judgements stating that in the instant case, the prosecution evidence must be held
to have been proved as:

(i) The quarrel was witnessed by P.W.8;

(ii) Thereafter the Appellants went to the house of the deceased, as stated by P.W.6;

(iii) The deceased was last seen in the company of the Appellants as was testified by P.W.1
and P.W.3;

(iv) Recovery of knife from the accused No. 2; and

(v) The approximate time during which, in view of the post- mortem report, the offence was
committed.

2. Indisputably, there is no eyewitness to the occurrence. Although the deceased is said to be

known to the Appellant No. 1 and they were on good terms, but on what basis the Appellant
Nos. 2 and 3 were said to be his associates is not known. In the FIR another accused,
Appellant No. 4 was also named. He, however, has been acquitted as none of the witnesses
named in their deposition or identified in the court. 14.6.1998 was a dark rainy night. The
quarrel was alleged to have taken place in a hotel. It was, however, stated that the same took
place on a road near Lakshmi theatre.

OBSERVATIONS:

In this case, the time of actual offence having regard to the different statements made by
different witnesses may assume some importance as one of the grounds whereupon the High
Court has based its judgment of conviction is the time of death of the deceased on the basis of
the opinion rendered by Dr. P. Venkateshvarlu (P.W.13). It was, therefore, extremely difficult
to purport the exact time of death of the deceased, more so when no sufficient reason was
assigned in the post- mortem report. The last-seen theory, furthermore, comes into play where
the time gap between the point of time when the accused and the deceased were last seen
 25

alive and the deceased is found dead is so small that possibility of any person other than the
accused being the author of the crime becomes impossible. Even in such a case courts should
look for some corroboration. It is, furthermore, well-known that motive by itself is not
sufficient to prove the guilt. Furthermore, the solitary witness, to prove the alleged motive,
namely, P.W.8 was examined by the police after two days. No reliance, thus, can be placed
on his evidence. It may be true that the Appellant No. 2 was a history-sheeter. It may further
be true that P.W.1 instituted a case against the Appellant No. 1 for threatening him when he
was on bail. It may also be, that P.W.7 did not identify the Appellants as he was found
shaking. If the Appellants are guilty of other offences, they can be proceeded against
appropriately and in accordance with law. We hope the authorities would do so.

JUDGMENT:

But, keeping in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the
opinion that the prosecution cannot be said to have established the guilt of the Appellants
herein beyond all shadow of doubt. The prosecution story has a large number of loopholes
and, thus, we have no other option but to hold that the Appellants are entitled to the benefit of
doubt. The impugned judgment is, therefore, set aside and the appeals are allowed. The
Appellants are directed to be set at liberty unless wanted in connection with other case.
 26

CONCLUSION:

The ever-increasing crime rate is demanding fast and sensitive methods for determining time
since death. A significant amount of work has been done by researchers to correctly
determine time since death. Algor mortis, rigor mortis, supravital reactions, and post-mortem
decomposition have been a routine tool for the estimation of post-mortem interval for many
years. The results of conventional methods are not precise and accurate. In a country like
India with wide variations of weather, post mortem interval each and every state needs to
have its own time table of rigor mortis so that it proves to be an effective tool for measuring
post-mortem interval.
 27

Bibliography:

Articles:

1. “ RIGOR MORTIS” by H.A.Shapiro, (M.D., Ph.D, F.R.S.S.AF)

2. “RIGOR MORTIS AND CATALEPTIC RIGOR MORTIS”Heinrich by

Hildebrand ( Translated from the German by Alfred W.Herzog) “

3. ‘ LEGAL MORTIS’ by William Minor, Deyerle.

4. “ Errors in estimating time since death” by W.R.L.James and B.H.Knight

5. “ sudden death due to Acute sickling” by A.Keith Mant

Statues :

1. C.K.Takwani, civil procedure code, Eastern Book Company, 2nd Edition, (1990)

2. Sir Woodroff & Syed Amir Ali, Law of Evidence, The Law company (p) Ltd., 16 th

Edition(1991)

3. Narayan Laxman Rao, Commentary on the code of civil procedure, 1204,2 nd Edition,

Asia Law House(2019)

28
29