Back
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : J.C. Verma
Dhula - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 493 of 1994
Decided On : 08/09/1996
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302, 307, 324 IPC - ACQUITTAL - EYE WITNESSES, EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION, RECOVERY OF BLOOD-STAINED KULHARI - EVIDENCE DISBELIEVED - PROSECUTION FAILED TO PROVE CASE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT - APPEAL ALLOWED, CONVICTION AND SENTENCE QUASHED, ACCUSED ACQUITTED.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted and sentenced for the murder of Smt. Roopli and causing simple injury to Ganesh by a sharp-edged weapon (Kulhari) under Sections 302 and 324 IPC, respectively. The prosecution relied on the evidence of eye witnesses, extra-judicial confession, and recovery of the blood-stained Kulhari.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of the eye witnesses was not reliable as they did not see the accused inflicting injuries to any person. The evidence of extra-judicial confession was also not reliable as the accused had no reason to confess his guilt to the witnesses. The recovery of the blood-stained Kulhari was also not reliable as the FSL report was not exhibited or produced in evidence and was not put to the accused in his statement under Section 313 CrPC.
Issues: 1. Whether the evidence of the eye witnesses was reliable? 2. Whether the evidence of extra-judicial confession was reliable? 3. Whether the recovery of the blood-stained Kulhari was reliable?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the evidence of the eye witnesses was not reliable as they did not see the accused inflicting injuries to any person. 2. The court held that the evidence of extra-judicial confession was not reliable as the accused had no reason to confess his guilt to the witnesses. 3. The court held that the recovery of the blood-stained Kulhari was not reliable as the FSL report was not exhibited or produced in evidence and was not put to the accused in his statement under Section 313 CrPC.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and sentence of the accused, and acquitted him of all charges.
B.R. Arora, J.-This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 8-9-94 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 1 , Udaipur, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused-appellant of the offence under Section 307 IPC but convicted and sentenced him for the offences under Section 302 and 324 IPC.
2. Theappellant was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Udaipur for the offence under Section 302 IPC for committing the murder of Smt. Roopli; under Section 307 IPC for an attempt to murder Smt. Raju and Rama and under Section 324 IPC for inflicting simple injuries to Ganesh by a shar-pedge weapon, i.e., the Kuihari.
3. Theprosecution, in support of its case, examined twelve witnesses. The accused did not examine any witness in his defence. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after trial, acquitted the appellant of the offence under Section 307 IPC for attempt to murder Smt. Raju (the mother of the accused) and Ram (the brother of the accused); but the learned Additional Sessions Judge, however, convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC for committing the murder of Smt. Roopli and under Section 324 IPC for causing simple injury by a sharp-edged weapon (Kulhari) to Ganesh (the nephew of the accused) and sentenced him to under to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500/-and in default of payment of fine further to undergo two months’ rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC and three years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 324 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It is against this Judgment dated 8-9-94 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Udaipur that the appellant has preferred this appeal.
4. Theprosecution to substantiate the charges for which the accused-appellant was tried, produced, fourteen witnesses. The nature of the evidence produced by the prosecution consists of the evidence of , the two eye witnesses, viz., PW-2 Ganesh and PW-4 Hakra Ram -the nephews of the accused and the sons of the deceased. Their evidence is sought to be corroborated by the evidence of PW-3 Thawra and PW-5 Thana relating to the extra-judicial confession and that of PW-1 Savji who lodged the FIR PW-6 Purkha, PW-7 Dola and PW-8 Mansa are the Motbir witnesses while PW-9 Dr. Anish Abmed was the doctor who performed autopsy on the dead body of Smt. Roopli and, also, medically examined the other injured persons. PW-13 Kanhaiya Lal was the Head Constable, in whose custody the sealed articles remained and who handed-over the same to PW- 10 Ram Narain for taking them for FSL Examination to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur. PW- 10 Ram Narain took the sealed articles for FSL Examination to the aforesaid Laboratory and deposited the same there. PW-11 Ratan Singh was the ASI Police posted at Police Station, Gordhan Yilas, Udaipur, who conducted the investigation and after completion of the same, placed the papers before Mool Chand, SHO who prepared the charge-sheet and submitted the challan.
5. The prosecution case rests upon three types of evidence, namely, (i) the evidence of the eye witnesses; (ii) the evidence relating to the extra-judicial confession; and (iii) the evidence relating to the recovery of the blood-stained Kuihari on the information and at the instance of the accused-appellant.
6. PW-2 Ganesh and PW-4 Hakra are the two eye witnesses of the occurrence. Ganesh was aged about 10 years and Hakra was 14 years at the relevant time. They are the nephews of the accused and the sons of the deceased. PW-2 Ganesh has stated that his mother Smt. Roopli was killed by his uncle Dhula by the Kuihari. The accused, also, inflicted injuries by Kuihari to his father Ramji. Dhula, also, inflicted injuries to him on his temporal region. Hakra is his elder brother who was, also, present there. His aunt (Taai) Smt. Raju was, also, there, to whom, also, the accused inflicted injuries by th
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
