152 A [2023] 8 S.C.R. 152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 8 S.C.R. PRAKASH NISHAD @ KEWAT ZINAK NISHAD v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (Criminal Appeal Nos.1636-1637 of 2023) B MAY 19, 2023 [B. R. GAVAI, VIKRAM NATH AND SANJAY KAROL, JJ.] C D E F G Evidence – Case of circumstantial evidence – Six year old child was sexually assaulted, killed and thrown her into a ‘nala’ – Appellant was arrested on the basis of suspicion – Charged for having committed offences punishable u/s.376, 377, 302 and 201, IPC –Concurrently convicted, death sentence imposed for the charge u/s.302 and sentenced for other offences – Correctness of – Held: There were yawning gaps in the chain of circumstances rendering it far from being established, pointing to the guilt of the appellant – Several irregularities and illegalities on the part of the agencies examining the case – Charges levied on the appellant not proved – Orders of the courts below set aside – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.376, 377, 302 and 201 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.53A – Criminal Law. Criminal Law– Whether non-recording of the disclosure statement of the appellant in the language in which it was made and recording it in a language totally unknown to the appellant, contents whereof were also not read over and explained to him, can be said to have caused any prejudice to the cause of justice? – Held: Yes – Appellant did not know how to read and write in Marathi – Perusal of the alleged disclosure statement reveals that it was recorded in Marathi and the Investigating officer not having read over or explained contents thereof to the appellant in his vernacular language i.e Hindi – It was important for the appellant to understand the case of the prosecution against him – There is nothing on record to show that it was not practicable to record evidence of the appellant as well as others, whose vernacular was not Marathi, but Hindi – Statutory safeguards in reference to language not having been complied with caused prejudice to the appellant– Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. H 152