Back
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : B.R. Arora,V.G. Palshikar
Kamji - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 465 of 1988
Decided On : 03/20/1995
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - SECTION 302 IPC - CONVICTION - EVIDENCE - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - LAST SEEN - RECOVERY OF WEAPON AND ORNAMENTS - MOTIVE - EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE - ACQUITTAL.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted by the trial court for the murder of Smt. Rangi under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution's case was that the appellant was last seen with the deceased in her field, that the deceased's ornaments were missing from her body when it was found, and that the appellant had led the police to the recovery of the murder weapon and the ornaments.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court found that the prosecution had failed to prove the circumstances relied upon by the trial court to convict the appellant. The court found that the evidence of the witnesses who claimed to have seen the appellant with the deceased was unreliable, that the recovery of the weapon and ornaments was not credible, and that there was no evidence to establish a motive for the appellant to commit the murder.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved the circumstances relied upon by the trial court to convict the appellant. 2. Whether the evidence of the witnesses who claimed to have seen the appellant with the deceased was reliable. 3. Whether the recovery of the weapon and ornaments was credible. 4. Whether there was evidence to establish a motive for the appellant to commit the murder.
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court held that the prosecution had failed to prove the circumstances relied upon by the trial court to convict the appellant. The court found that the evidence of the witnesses who claimed to have seen the appellant with the deceased was unreliable, that the recovery of the weapon and ornaments was not credible, and that there was no evidence to establish a motive for the appellant to commit the murder. The court held that the prosecution had failed to prove the offence against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt and acquitted him.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, and acquitted the appellant.
B.R. Arora, J.-This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 6-12-1988 passed by the Sessions Judge, Banswara, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rupees 500/-and in default of payment of fine further to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.
2. Appellant Kamji - a resident of village Palodra was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara, for committing the murder of Smt. Rangi widow of late Kodar. on 1-4-85 in her cotton field. The case of the prosecution is that on 1-4-85 the deceased Smt. Rangi and accused Kamji were collecting the cotton crop in the field of the son of deceased Smt. Rangi. P.W. Narbada, PW. 4 Smt. Kamla W/o PW. 15 Parteng and PW. 15 Parteng were, also, in their field. Smt. Narbada left the field at about 4-00 p.m. after collecting some fodder. Thereafter PW. 4 Smt. Kamla and PW. 15 Parteng also left the field while the deceased and the accused were left in the field. Smt. Rangi was wearing some silver ornaments. Thereafter Smt. Rangi was not seen alive and on the next day the ornaments, which she was wearing, were not found present on the corpse of Smt. Rangi. Accused Kamji was also, not seen thereafter. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined 19 witnesses. The accused did not examine any witness in his defence. The nature of the evidence, produced by the prosecution, consists of the statements of PW. 4 Smt. Kamla P.W. 15 Parteng and PW. 18 Smt. Narbada. who had last seen the accused in the company of the deceased in her field when they were collecting the cotton crop. This evidence is sought to be corroborated from the statements of PW. 19 Ghanshyam Dutta. PW. 6 Jaggi and PW. 16 Anadeng in whose presence the recoveries of the knife - the weapon of offence - and the ornaments of the deceased, which she was wearing at the time when she was collecting the cotton crop, were recovered and the ornaments, which the deceased was wearing, were identified by the witnesses P.W. 3 Parbateng. PW. 4 Smt. Kamla. PW. 5 Narang. PW. 14 Nathji and P.W. 15 Parteng to be belonging to the deceased. PW. I Vithla was informed by P.W. 3 Parbateng. PW. 14 Nathji and PW. 18 Smt. Narbada regarding the murder of Smt. Rangi in the field and that her deadbody was lying in the field and was asked.to go to the village to inform Roopeng and Nareng regarding the murder of Smt. Rangi. PW. 5 Nareng and P.W. 10 Rupeng have been produced to prove that PW. 1 Vithal informed them regarding the murder of Smt. Rangi in her field and her deadbody was lying there P.W. 2 Amrit Lal is a Motbir witness to the site plan; P.W. 11 Amreng is a Motbir witness to the recovery of the deadbody and the other articles while P.W. 12 Nathji is a witness to the recoveries and preparation of various memos P.W. 7 Dr. Bilas Raj was the Medical Jurist, who conducted the post-mortem on the deadbody of Smt. Rangi. P.W. 8 Mr. Matadeen Gupta was the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara, who conducted the identification of the ornaments and according to this witness, all the witnesses correctly identified these articles. P.W. 9 Nathu Lal was the Police Constable posted at the Police Station, who took the sealed articles for F.S.L. examination and after obtaining the forwarding letter from the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Banswara, deposited the same in the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur.
P.W. 13 Kushal Singh was the S.H.O., who conducted the initial investigation, made certain recoveries, prepared certain memos and the investigation was thereafter taken by P.W. 19 Ghanshyam Dutta. who arrested the accused, recovered the knife - the weapon of the offence -as well as the ornaments and submitted the challan. P.W. 17 Gumanabeng is the son of the deceased, who has slated that on the day of the incident, he had gone to village Koopda and returned in the night to village Thikariya and on his retur
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
