Back
2011 (8) Supreme 225
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Swatanter Kumar and Ranjana Prakash Desai, JJ.
State of Rajasthan — Appellant
versus
Shera Ram @ Vishnu Dutta — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1502 of 2005
Decided on : 1-12-2011
Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sections-84, 302, 295 and 449-Prosecution of respondent for causing death of deceased by abruptly hurling a stone on his head resulting into his instantaneous death- Respondent also damaged the idol and other properties of the Temple- This all was unprovoked.-Conviction by Trial Court-Appeal-High Court acquitted Respondent on the ground that at the time of incident, he was a person of unsound mind -Appeal-Case of the prosecution suffered from legal infirmity as prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the injury inflicted by respondent upon the deceased was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death-In the statement of PW-20, Dr. it was nowhere stated that injuries caused by respondent were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death-This was a material piece of evidence which the prosecution was expected to prove in order to bring home the guilt of respondent- This was a serious deficiency in the case of prosecution- Absence of this material piece of evidence caused a dent in the case of the prosecution-Ex-facie, injuries not appeared to be so vital that they could have resulted in the death of the deceased, but this fact was required to be proved by expert evidence-No documentary or oral evidence to prove the fact that injuries caused by respondent to the deceased were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death-No error found in the judgment under appeal- Appeal dismissed (Paras 30 to 36)
Facts of the Case :
A Respondent was prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of deceased by abruptly hurling a stone on his head resulting into his instantaneous death. Respondent also damaged the idol and other properties of the Temple. This all was unprovoked, Trial Court convicted respondent .On Appeal, High Court acquitted Respondent on the ground that at the time of incident, he was a person of unsound mind .
B. Present appeal has been filed against said order of acquittal.
Findings of the Court :
Oral and documentary evidence clearly showed that respondent was suffering from epileptic attacks just prior to the incident. Immediately prior to the occurrence, he had behaved violently and had caused injuries to his own family members. After committing the crime, he was arrested by the Police and even thereafter, he was treated for insanity, while in jail. Thus, there was evidence to show continuous mental sickness of the respondent. High Court on the basis of documentary and oral evidence had a taken a view which was a possible and could not be termed as perverse or being supported by no evidence. Finding of High Court, being in consonance with well settled principles of criminal jurisprudence, did not call for any interference. Appeal was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Swatanter Kumar, J.
1. Respondent Shera Ram @ Vishnu Dutta was charged for committing an offence under Sections 302, 295 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life by the Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jodhpur vide judgment dated 7th June, 2000. However, upon appeal, he came to be acquitted of all the offences by a Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan vide order dated 21st February, 2004 primarily on the ground that at the time of incident, he was a person of unsound mind within the meaning of Section 84 IPC and was directed to be detained in safe custody in an appropriate hospital or a place of custody of non-criminal lunatics as would be provided to him by the State Government under the direct supervision of the Jail Authorities till the time he was cured of his mental illness and infirmity.
2. Aggrieved from the said judgment, the State of Rajasthan has presented this appeal by way of a special leave petition.
3. Before we proceed to dwell upon the merits of the case and the legal issues involved in the present appeal, a reference to the case of the prosecution would be necessary. According to the prosecution, on 10th March, 1999 at about 7.15 a.m., while Pujari Tulsi Das (now deceased) was in the Raghunathji’s temple, the respondent abruptly hurled a stone on his head resulting into his instantaneous death. The respondent also damaged the idol and other properties of the temple. This all was unprovoked. The incident was witnessed by the villagers including PW-6 Santosh, PW-11 Narsingh Ram and PW-16, Smt. Tiku Devi.
4. PW-2, Ghan Shyam Das Daga reported the matter to the police immediately. Upon receipt of the information, the police registered a case under Section 302 IPC and proceeded with the investigation. Besides recording statements of number of witnesses, the Investigating Officer also prepared the site plan and the inquest memo. The body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem which was performed by PW-20, Dr. C.P. Bhati, who prepared the post-mortem report Ext. P-37.
5. After investigation, the police filed the challan upon which, the respondent was committed to the appropriate Court of Sessions for trial. The charge-sheet was filed under Sections 302, 295 and 449 IPC, as already noticed. The respondent denied the charges leveled against him and claimed trial.
6. The prosecution examined as many as 23 witnesses to prove its case. The material piece of evidence appearing in the case of the prosecution against the respondent were put to him and his statement was recorded by the learned Trial Court under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.PC’). According to the respondent, his mental condition right from the year 1992-1993 was not good and occasionally he suffered from fits of insanity. He had undergone treatment for the same. He has stated that in the jail also, he was receiving the treatment. To put it simply, he claimed the defence of insanity under Section 84 IPC. The defence also examined DW-2, Dr. Vimal Kumar Razdan and DW-1, Bhanwar Lal, brother of the respondent who had produced records to show that the respondent was a person suffering from insanity of mind. The learned Trial Court rejected the plea of defence of insanity and convicted the respondent.
7. The respondent preferred an appeal against the judgment and order of conviction by the Trial Court which resulted in his acquittal vide order dated 21st February, 2004 with the afore-noticed directions to the State Government. Dissatisfied from the said judgment, the State has preferred the present appeal.
8. As is evident from the above-noted facts, it is an appeal against the judgment of acquittal. The plea of insanity raised by the respondent has been accepted by the High Court resulting in his acquittal.
9. A judgment of acquittal has the obvious consequence of granting freedom to the accused. This Court has taken a consistent view that unl
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
