In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has held that a person can be convicted of murder even if the victim’s body is never recovered. The court clarified that the law requires proof that a murder was committed—not the production of the victim’s body—and warned that making recovery of the body mandatory would allow offenders who successfully dispose of evidence to escape punishment.
The judgment came while upholding the life sentence of an Assam man convicted of murdering his 10-year-old adopted niece in 2015. According to the prosecution, the accused disposed of the child’s body by throwing it into a river, where it was never found.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prasanna B. Varale ruled that the prosecution had proved the crime through credible circumstantial evidence, including witness testimony and the accused’s failure to explain the child’s disappearance while she was in his exclusive care.
The court explained that the legal principle of “corpus delicti” means proving that a crime has occurred, not necessarily recovering the victim’s body. It emphasized that reliable direct or circumstantial evidence is sufficient to establish murder.
Dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the accused’s life imprisonment for murder and seven-year sentence for destruction of evidence, reaffirming that justice can be served even when a victim’s body is not recovered.
