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

1994 Supreme(Raj) 987

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
J.R.Chopra, Rajendra Saxena, JJ.
Gurdeo Singh and Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 500 of 1987.
Decided On : 29-11-1994

In a criminal case, the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. However, if there is a reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt and must be acquitted.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 IPC - FACTUAL MATRIX - EYE-WITNESSES TURNED HOSTILE - SOLE TESTIMONY OF VICTIM'S DAUGHTER - MEDICAL EVIDENCE - COMMON INTENTION - BENEFIT OF DOUBT - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE SUSTAINED FOR TWO ACCUSED - ACQUITTAL FOR OTHER TWO ACCUSED.

Fact of the Case:

Deceased Niranjan Singh and his daughter Mst. Jaswinder Kaur were attacked by four accused persons, Gurdeo Singh, Gyan Singh, Khadag Singh, and Shravan Singh, while they were returning from Hanumangarh Tehsil. The accused persons, armed with sharp-edged weapons, inflicted multiple injuries on Niranjan Singh, resulting in his death. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses, but most of them turned hostile. The main evidence relied upon was the testimony of Mst. Jaswinder Kaur, corroborated by the medical evidence and the statement of a Sarpanch who reached the scene after the incident.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the testimony of Mst. Jaswinder Kaur was consistent and supported by medical evidence. The court also considered the fact that the accused persons had a prior enmity with the deceased and his family. However, the court gave the benefit of doubt to accused Gyan Singh and Shravan Singh, as there was no independent corroboration of their participation in the crime.

Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the accused persons had a common intention to kill the deceased. 3. Whether the accused persons were entitled to the benefit of doubt.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had proved the guilt of accused Gurdeo Singh and Khadag Singh beyond reasonable doubt. The court relied on the testimony of Mst. Jaswinder Kaur, which was consistent and corroborated by medical evidence. The court also considered the fact that the accused persons had a prior enmity with the deceased and his family. However, the court gave the benefit of doubt to accused Gyan Singh and Shravan Singh, as there was no independent corroboration of their participation in the crime.

Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal. The conviction and sentence of accused Gurdeo Singh and Khadag Singh were upheld, while the conviction and sentence of accused Gyan Singh and Shravan Singh were set aside, and they were acquitted.

JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh dated 1.12.1987, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has held accused appellants Gurdeo Singh, Gyan Singh, Khadag Singh and Shravan Singh guilty for the offence under section 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced each one of them to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 15 days imprisonment. Hence this appeal.

2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are that deceased Niranjan Singh and his daughter Mst. Jaswinder Kaur P.W. 8 went from their village Dabli Rathan to Hanumangarh for obtaining money from Tehsil Hanumangarh as regards their land. They came to their village Dabli Rathan at 3.30 p.m. by bus. As soon as they alighted from the bus near the shop of Gurbachan Singh, Khadag Singh came there on his cycle. Accused Gurdeo Singh and Gyan Singh were sitting in front of the shop of Gurbachan Singh. He told these two accused persons that this man has to be caught and cut and thereafter Khadag Singh, who was armed with a gandasa caught hold of Niranjan Singh from behind his back. At that time, these two accused persons i.e. Gurdeo Singh and Gyan Singh came from the shop of Gurbachan Singh. Gurdeo Singh was armed with a Kapa (fodder cutting instrument with sharp edges, the blade of which was 1 foot and 41/2 long, while Gyan Singh was armed with a gandasa. Niranjan Singh was having a stick in his hand and when Gurdeo Singh tried to inflict a blow with his Kapa on his head he raised his hands, whereby the fingers of his hand were cut and injuries Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 were received by him detailed in the post-mortem examination report Ex. P. 6. Thereafter, it is alleged that Gyan Singh inflicted a blow with his gandasa on the waist of Niranjan Singh and thereafter Gurdeo Singh again inflicted a Kapa blow on his head. Thereafter it is alleged that all the accused persons started beating Niranjan Singh. When Mst. P.W. 8 Jaswinder Kaur tried to intervene, Gurdeo Singh threw her away by catching hold of her "Chutiliya" and as it was a sandy place, she did not receive any injury on her body. At that time, P.W. 1 Shehare Khan came there from the bus stand side and intervened and told the accused persons not to kill him, but it was of no avail. P.W. 3 Mahindra Singh also came there and witnessed the occurrence. It is alleged that in the meantime Shravan Singh came there on his cycle from the market side and told his companions that this man should be killed. It is alleged that deceased Niranjan Singh had killed the brother of the accused persons and has been released on bail only before six months of this occurrence, they availed him. They had also enmity with the complainant party about their field and therefore this occurrence has taken place. Soon after the occurrence Sarpanch P.W. 7. Chandra Bhan came there and Mst. Jaswindra Kaur narrated to him the entire incident and he accompanied her to report the matter to the police, where an oral report was lodged by Jaswindra Kaur, which has been marked as Ex. P. 7. Post-mortem of the dead body of Niranjan Singh was got conducted, which has been marked as Ex. P. 6. A panchnama of the dead body was prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 8 Site Plan was prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 9 and site inspection memo was also prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 9A. The watch of the deceased was recovered from the dead body of Niranjan Singh vide seizure memo Ex. P.10. Seizure memos of blood stained oil and controlled soil were prepared, which have been marked as Ex. P. 11 and Ex. P. 12 respectively. An inquest report was also prepared, which has been marked as Ex. P. 14. Blood stained clothes of the deceased were obtained, which has been marked as Ex. P. 15. The accused persons were arrested by the police and on their information and at their inst




















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top