Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan has set aside a man’s conviction under Section 302 Indian Penal Code,1860 (IPC), citing procedural lapses in the trial court’s handling of prosecution witness contradictions.  

• The Supreme Court held this in the matter of Vinod Kumar v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (2025). 
• Statements must be properly introduced through the investigating officer, not merely reproduced in brackets. This judgment clarifies the correct procedure for proving prior witness statements in cross-examination. 

What was the Background of Vinod Kumar v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) Case? 

• The case involves an appellant named Vinod Kumar who was convicted under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 
• The appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment and ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, with an additional one year of rigorous imprisonment in default of payment. 
• The conviction was initially rendered by the Sessions Court (Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Delhi) and subsequently confirmed by the High Court of Delhi. 
• The case pertains to the death of one Dharminder, who was the appellant's neighbor. 
• On 12th July 1995, around noon, the appellant allegedly took the deceased with him, stating they would return soon. 
• The deceased's body was discovered on 14th July, 1995, in a bathroom on a building's terrace, with a rope tied to the neck and hands bound behind the back. 
• The prosecution's case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, primarily focusing on:  
  • Last seen together theory 
  • Evasive replies given by the appellant 
  • Proximity of time between last seen and death 
  • Appellant's absconding behavior 
  • Recovery of bloodstained clothes 
  • Unexplained injuries on appellant's person 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Court noted significant deficiencies in the prosecution's evidence, particularly regarding the testimony of prosecution witnesses PW-1 (father) and PW-3 (mother). 
• The Court identified multiple material omissions in PW-3's testimony that amounted to contradictions under Section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC). 
• The Court determined that the prosecution failed to establish two crucial circumstances beyond reasonable doubt:  
  • The "last seen together" theory 
  • The appellant's alleged evasive replies 
• The Court observed that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and conclusively establish guilt. 
• The Court identified a procedural irregularity in the trial court's handling of witness contradictions under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. 
• The Court established that prior statements used for contradictions must be properly proved through the investigating officer before being incorporated into witness depositions. 
• The Court stipulated that trial judges should mark contradicted portions with identifiers (AA, BB, etc.) and ensure proper proof before including them in depositions. 
• The Court observed the absence of any established motive for the commission of the offence, which was particularly significant given the circumstantial nature of the evidence. 

What is Section 180 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS )? 

• Section 180 of BNSS deals with police examination of witnesses during investigation and consists of three subsections with additional provisos. 
• Under subsection (1): 
  • Any investigating police officer or authorized police officer (of rank prescribed by State Government) can orally examine persons believed to have knowledge of the case. 
• Under subsection (2), the examined person must:  
  • Answer all questions truthfully related to the case. 
  • Not be compelled to answer questions that may incriminate them or expose them to penalty/forfeiture. 
• Under subsection (3), the police officer:  
  • May record written statements during examination. 
  • Must maintain separate and true records for each person's statement. 
  • Can record statements through audio-video electronic means. 
• Special provisions are made for recording statements of women victims:  
  • Applies to offences under Sections 64-71, 74-79, and 124 of BNS. 
  • Statements must be recorded by either: a. A woman police officer, or b. Any woman officers. 
• The section aims to:  
  • Facilitate proper investigation. 
  • Protect witness rights against self-incrimination. 
  • Ensure proper documentation of witness statements. 
  • Provide gender-sensitive handling of women victims' cases. 

What is Section 181 of BNSS? 

• General Prohibition:  
  • Statements made to police during investigation must not be signed by the person making them. 
  • Such statements cannot be used at any inquiry or trial except as specifically provided. 
• Usage in Court Proceedings:  
  • When a prosecution witness is called whose statement was recorded during investigation. 
  • The accused may use any part of the statement to contradict the witness 
  • The prosecution may also use it with court permission. 
  • Such contradiction must follow Section 148 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. 
• Re-examination Rights:  
  • When a statement is used for contradiction. 
  • Any part of it may be used in re-examination. 
  • Limited to explaining matters raised in cross-examination. 
• Exceptions:  
  • Does not apply to statements under Section 26(a) of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. 
  • Does not affect provisions of Section 23(2) proviso of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. 
• Regarding Omissions:  
  • An omission in the statement can amount to contradiction. 
  • Must be significant and relevant in context. 
  • Whether an omission amounts to contradiction is a question of fact. 
  • Context of the omission is crucial for determining contradiction. 
• Purpose of the Section:  
  • Protects against misuse of police statements. 
  • Ensures proper procedure for using statements in court. 
  • Provides framework for handling contradictions and omissions. 
  • Balances rights of accused and prosecution.