In Brief
Two appellants were convicted for the murder of Netai Mohanta. The dead body was discovered concealed under wooden floorboards in a house rented by appellant Ranjit Haldar. Appellant Mamta Mohanta (the deceased's wife) disclosed the location of the body. The appellants argued that without DNA testing, identity was unproven; that the non-examination of the FIR translator undermined the case; and that the recovery was only on the wife's statement. The Court held that eyewitness identification by clothing and personal items was sufficient; that the translator's non-examination was immaterial to the investigation; and that Ranjit Haldar's exclusive possession of the house triggered a burden under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act to explain the presence of the body, which he failed to discharge. The convictions were affirmed.", <parameter name="subject_tags">["Criminal Law", "Evidence Act", "Circumstantial Evidence", "Burden of Proof", "Section 106 Evidence Act", "Murder", "Identity of Deceased"]
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.