Postmortem Report By Itself Not A Substantive Evidence, Can’t Discharge Murder Accused Only Based On It: SC
📌 Legal Principle
A postmortem report (or medical report) is considered only an opinion of a medical expert under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
It is a piece of corroborative evidence, which requires support from other evidence like eyewitness testimony, circumstantial evidence, or documentary proof.
By itself, a postmortem report cannot establish the guilt or innocence of an accused in a murder trial.
Therefore, a Court cannot discharge an accused from a Section 302 IPC (murder) charge only on the basis of what the postmortem report states.
📌 Why Postmortem Alone is Not Enough
Opinion Evidence Only
Medical evidence only gives an opinion on the cause, time, and nature of death. It does not prove who committed the crime.
Cannot Substitute Direct or Circumstantial Evidence
The cause of death may be homicidal, but unless prosecution shows nexus between accused and crime, postmortem cannot establish culpability.
Court’s Duty at Discharge Stage (Sections 227 & 239 CrPC)
At the discharge stage, if there is prima facie material connecting the accused with the crime, the case must proceed to trial.
Discharge cannot be granted merely because the postmortem report does not match certain aspects of the prosecution story.
📌 Important Case Laws
Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat (AIR 1983 SC 484)
The Supreme Court held that medical evidence is only advisory. If there is reliable eyewitness evidence, it prevails over medical opinion unless it completely rules out prosecution version.
State of Haryana v. Bhagirath (AIR 1999 SC 2005)
Court observed that medical opinion is not the last word and cannot override trustworthy eyewitness account. It must be considered as corroborative only.
Ram Swaroop v. State of U.P. (AIR 1980 SC 791)
It was held that postmortem report alone is not substantive evidence; it must be proved by examining the doctor, and even then, it only supports other evidence.
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dharkole @ Govind Singh (2004) 13 SCC 308
SC clarified that expert opinion is fallible, hence cannot be the sole basis of acquittal/discharge.
K. Ramachandran v. V.N. Rajan (2009) 5 SCC 573
Court held that cause of death in postmortem report cannot by itself connect the accused with the offence.
State of U.P. v. Krishna Gopal (AIR 1988 SC 2154)
The Court reiterated that where ocular testimony is consistent, medical opinion cannot nullify it unless it makes the prosecution case impossible.
📌 Conclusion
The Supreme Court has consistently held:
A postmortem report is not substantive evidence.
It only assists the Court in understanding the manner of death.
It cannot be the sole ground to discharge a murder accused under CrPC.
The trial must continue if there is other prima facie evidence linking the accused to the offence.
👉 Thus, unless supported by other reliable material, a postmortem report cannot exonerate or implicate an accused in a murder case.
RELATED Blog
0 comments