Taher Vajiyuddin Rangwala & Anr v. The State of Gujarat
2026 INSC 859 · Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 2020
Coram: K. Vinod Chandran; J. B. Pardiwala
No. Conduct such as fleeing in panic, the accused's silence, or returning the soda bottles is not an incriminating circumstance where that conduct is probable even where the death was accidental.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s.302 — s.34 — s.201 — s.120B — Circumstances — Homicidal death — Hypothesis of innocence —
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s.302 — Circumstances — Proof of homicidal death —
Held: Where a conviction rests on circumstances, the prosecution must first prove that the death itself was homicidal; post-mortem evidence that leans in favour of the accused's version of an accidental drowning leaves the hypothesis of innocence intact. (¶10, 23)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss.302, 34 — Circumstances — Post-incident conduct not incriminating —
Held further: Conduct after the incident — fleeing in panic, the accused's silence, or returning the soda bottles — is not an incriminating circumstance since that is probable conduct where there was an accident of drowning; appeal allowed, conviction and sentence set aside. (¶21, 22, 24)
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 21The motive, as we observed, was an afterthought. The last seen theory and the presence of the accused near the scene of occurrence is admitted by the accused and their defense is that the deceased accidentally drowned. As for homicidal death, there was nothing coming out from the post-mortem report and the testimony of the Doctor, PW-1, in proof of homicide. On the contrary the medical evidence tilts the scales towards an accidental drowning. The silence of the accused and their having not informed the family members of the deceased, cannot be an incriminating circumstance since that was a probable conduct, even if there was an accident of drowning. In fact, the specific testimony of PW-12 was that, though not initially, but later, the accused confessed to have fled in panic, on seeing the deceased drowning. The conduct of the accused having lied to PW-15 about having dropped her brother at 02:30 pm in a specific location, again does not incriminate the accused, given the defense.
Paragraph 22Admission in the bail application, as relied on by the High Court, is a very difficult premise to accept. In this context, we also have to notice the High Court’s presumption that no person who saw his friend drowning would go to a movie or would take the trouble of bringing back empty soda bottles to the shop from where they purchased it. If such a presumption is accepted then it can be presumed that even after a premeditated murder, the accused would not conduct themselves in that manner. The human mind, as has often been held by this Court, is at the same time fickle, manipulative and imaginative and the actions, the result of a deprived or a foolish mindset, especially in the face of adversities, which cannot be predicted. The subsequent conduct on which the High Court found possible the prosecution story of murder rather than of drowning, in this case we are unable to accept. It is the hypothesis of an accidental drowning that looms large from the evidence led at the trial; more plausible than a homicide.
Paragraph 23None of the circumstances having been proved, we are inclined to find the probable and more possible version of the accused, that the deceased drowned accidentally. The accused are guilty of having fled from the spot and not having attempted to rescue the drowning person, by crying out for help. Their conduct of having gone for a movie after witnessing their friend drowning, though reprehensible, cannot be found to be an incriminating circumstance, to establish murder rather than drowning. The hypothesis of innocence is crystal clear, and circumstances indicate an accident and not a premeditated murder.
One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
Read the full text of Taher Vajiyuddin Rangwala & Anr v. The State of Gujarat — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.
Create my free accountFree forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India