SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Raj) 177

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Shiv Kumar Sharma,Vineet Kothari
Mod Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 904 of 2002
Decided On : 01/19/2006

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Biri Singh Sinsinwar, Mr. Kamlendra Sihag, Mr. Mahendra P. Khandelwal, for the
Appellants.
Mr. Brahmanand Sandu, Public Prosecutor, for the State.

The judgment establishes the principle that the relationship of a witness to the deceased does not automatically render their testimony unreliable, and the probative value of evidence should be evaluated in the context of the entire record.

Headnote:

IPC - Criminal Law - Section 302, Section 326, Section 324, Section 148 - The judgment discusses the prosecution's case, the testimony of witnesses, and the court's analysis of the evidence. It highlights the court's scrutiny of the witnesses' testimony, the legal principles regarding the reliability of close relatives as witnesses, and the court's findings on the charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted and sentenced for their involvement in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including murder, causing hurt, and rioting. The prosecution's case relied on the testimony of eyewitnesses and the post mortem report.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution's evidence, particularly the testimony of one eyewitness, was reliable and consistent, leading to the conviction of three appellants. However, the court acquitted one appellant due to doubts about her participation in the crime.

Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of eyewitness testimony, especially when the witnesses were close relatives of the deceased, and the scrutiny of the evidence to establish the charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the mere relationship of a witness to the deceased does not render their testimony unreliable. It also highlighted the need for caution in evaluating the probative value of evidence and the importance of examining the entire mosaic of acts appearing from the record.

Final Decision: The appeal of one appellant was allowed, leading to her acquittal, while the appeal of three appellants was dismissed, confirming their conviction and sentence under the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Judgment

Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.-Mod Singh, Smt. Harku Bai, Sardara and Ramesh, the appellants herein, alongwith one Bhuri Bai (absconded during trial), were placed on trial in Sessions Case No. 20/2000, before learned Additional Sessions Judge Aklera, District Jhalawar, who vide Judgment dated 02.07.2002 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:-

Mod Singh, Harku Bai, Sardara and Ramesh:

Under Section 302/149 IPC:

Each to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to further suffer two months

imprisonment.

Under Section 326/149 IPC:

Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 500/-in default to further

suffer one month imprisonment.

Under Section 324/149 IPC:

Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer one month imprisonment.

Under Section 148, IPC:

Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further

suffer one month imprisonment.

Substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case is as under:-On 212.1999 parcha bayan (Exhibit P-1) of Ratan Lal (PW. 11) was recorded wherein he stated that on the said day around 12 Noon while he alongwith Ummeda and Man Singh were traveling in a bus, Harku Bai and Bhuri Bai pulled Ummeda (now deceased) down from the bus. Ramesh Mod Singh and Sardara belaboured Ummeda and Ramesh inflicted knife blow on the abdomen of Ummeda, whereas Mod Singh inflicted knife blow on his chest and Sardara gave axe-blow on his neck. Harku Bai and Bhuri Bai caused injuries with lathis. On the basis of aforesaid parcha bayan case under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148 and 149 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Autopsy on the dead body was performed, statements of witnesses were recorded, accused were arrested and necessary memos were drawn. On completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Aklera District Jhalawar. Charges under Sections 147, 148, 302/149, 326/149, 324/149 and 120-B IPC were framed. The appellants denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 19 witnesses. In the explanation under Section 313 CrPC, the appellants claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.

3. We have heard the rival submissions and scrutinised the record.

4. Death of Ummeda was indisputably homicidal in nature. As per post mortem report (Exhibit P-18) Ummeda received as many as 23 antimortem incised wounds and cause of his death according to Dr. Mohd. Akbar (PW. 14) was hemorrhage due to cut injuries on throat.

5. The prosecution case rests on the testimony of Ratan Lal (PW. 16), Ganga Bai, (PW. 17), and Man Singh (PW. 18), who have been examined as eye-witnesses of the occurrence. In his deposition Ratan Lal (PW. 16) stated that at Khakhra stand Ramesh, Harku, Sardara, Bhuri and Mod Singh dragged his son Ummeda down from the bus and Mod Singh, Ramesh, Harku and Bhuri gave knife blows on the person of Ummeda, whereas Sardara inflicted axe blow on his neck as a result of which Ummeda died on the spot. Ganga Bai (PW. 17) deposed that at the time when her son Ummeda was attacked she reached at khakra Bus-stand. According to her Harku and Bhuri had caught hold of Ummeda while Ramesh, Sardara and Mod Singh were inflicting injuries with knives. In her cross-examination she however admitted that on receiving information that Ummeda was killed, she and her husband rushed to the place of incident. Man Singh (PW. 18) stated that while he, his father, mother and brother Ummeda were coming from Manoharthana in a bus, Bhuri and Harku got Ummeda down from the bus at Khakhra bus-stand and Ramesh, Sardara and Mod Singh inflicted injuries with knives and Gandasi. Himmat Singh (PW. 15) conducted t
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top