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

1983 Supreme(Raj) 352

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JODHPUR BENCH
M.C.Jain, S.C.Agrawal, JJ.
The State of Rajasthan - Appellant
Versus
Nandlal Arora - Respondent
D. B. Criminal appeal No. 436 of 1973 ( against the judgment of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ganganagar, dated 16-3-1973 in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1972.).
Decided On : 26-04-1983

The prosecution must establish, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused is guilty of the offence charged.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 307 I.P.C. - ATTEMPT TO COMMIT MURDER - CASE OF THE PROSECUTION - CASE OF THE RESPONDENT - ISSUES - RATIO DECIDENDI - FINAL DECISION: The respondent was acquitted of the charge of attempting to commit the murder of his wife Smt. Kausalya by administering poison to her. The prosecution's case was that the respondent had extended a threat that he would kill Smt. Kausalya after the marriage of his sister, which took place on 4th March, 1972. After the marriage, Smt. Kausalya informed about the threat to her brother, Shantilal (P.W. 3) when he came to see her and on the date of incident, i.e. 25th March, 1972, Ramdittaram (P. W. 2), the father of Smt. Kausalya came and met the father of the respondent. The prosecution further alleged that on 25th March, 1972 at about 11 P.M. Smt. Kausalya was sleeping in her room and the respondent came to the room with a cup of milk and after mixing a greenish powder in the milk, he asked Srnt. Kausalya to drink it and when she refused to do so he gave a couple of slaps and also threatened to kill her and, therefore, due to the fear Smt. Kausalya took the milk and 4-5 minutes thereafter she became unconscious. The respondent pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent on the view that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond doubt. The High Court held that the prosecution has failed to establish, beyond reasonable doubt, its case that it was the respondent who had administered poison (barbiturate) to Smt. Kausalya and no ground is made out for interference with the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge acquitting the respondent of the offence under section 307 I.P.C.

Fact of the Case:

The respondent was charged with attempting to commit the murder of his wife Smt. Kausalya by administering poison to her. The prosecution's case was that the respondent had extended a threat that he would kill Smt. Kausalya after the marriage of his sister, which took place on 4th March, 1972. After the marriage, Smt. Kausalya informed about the threat to her brother, Shantilal (P.W. 3) when he came to see her and on the date of incident, i.e. 25th March, 1972, Ramdittaram (P. W. 2), the father of Smt. Kausalya came and met the father of the respondent. The prosecution further alleged that on 25th March, 1972 at about 11 P.M. Smt. Kausalya was sleeping in her room and the respondent came to the room with a cup of milk and after mixing a greenish powder in the milk, he asked Srnt. Kausalya to drink it and when she refused to do so he gave a couple of slaps and also threatened to kill her and, therefore, due to the fear Smt. Kausalya took the milk and 4-5 minutes thereafter she became unconscious.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that the prosecution has failed to establish, beyond reasonable doubt, its case that it was the respondent who had administered poison (barbiturate) to Smt. Kausalya and no ground is made out for interference with the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge acquitting the respondent of the offence under section 307 I.P.C.

Issues: Whether the prosecution has established, beyond reasonable doubt, its case that it was the respondent who had administered poison (barbiturate) to Smt. Kausalya.

Ratio Decidendi: The High Court held that the prosecution has failed to establish, beyond reasonable doubt, its case that it was the respondent who had administered poison (barbiturate) to Smt. Kausalya and no ground is made out for interference with the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge acquitting the respondent of the offence under section 307 I.P.C.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed.

JUDGMENT

1. 1. This appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment dated 16th March, 1973 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ganganagar, in Sessions Trial No. 11/1972. In the Sessions Trial aforesaid, the respondent Nandlal was prosecuted for the offence under section 307 I. P. C. for having attempted to commit the murder of his wife Smt. Kausalya. The Additional Sessions Judge, by his judgment aforesaid, acquitted the respondent of the said charge on the view that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond doubt.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent and Smt. Kausalya were married in 1965 and that the respondent was not happy with his wife for the reason that she was not beautiful and she was not educated and that the respondent used to beat her and also used to say that if she died he would remarry. Both of them had a daughter aged about two years at the time of the incident. The case of the prosecution is further that the respondent had extended a threat that he would kill Smt. Kausalya after the marriage of his sister which took place on 4th March, 1972. After the aforesaid marriage of the sister of the respondent Smt. Kausalya informed about the threat to her brother, Shantilal (P.W. 3} when he came to see her and on the date of incident, i. e. 25th March, 1972, Ramdittaram (P. W. 2), the father of Smt. Kausalya came and met the father of the respondent. The case of the prosecution is further that on 25th March, 1972 at about 11 P.M. Smt. Kausalya was sleeping in her room and the respondent came to the room with a cup of milk and after mixing a greenish powder in the milk, he asked Srnt. Kausalya to drink it and when she refused to do so he gave a couple of slaps and also threatened to kill her and, therefore, due to the fear Smt. Kausalya took the milk and 4-5 minutes thereafter she became unconscious. Smt. Kausalya was admitted in an unconscious condition in the General Hospital, Sri Ganganagar on 26th March, 1972 at 8 a. m. On 26th March, 1972 at about 2 P.M. Dr. A. R. Das (P. W. 1) Medical Jurist, General Hospital, Sri Ganganagar sent a report (Ex.P.7) to the S.H.O. P. S. Sadar, Sri Ganganagar, whereby it was intimated that a case of suspected poisoning, named Smt. Kausalya, was admitted in the hospital at 8 a. m. on March 26,1972 in an unconscious state and that she was stall unconscious. By his letter (Ex. P.8) dated 29th March, 1972 Dr. A. R. Das informed the S.H.O., P. S. Sadar, Sri Ganganagar that the patient who had been admitted in an unconscious state on 26th March, 1972 had become conscious and was fit to give a statement. On 30th March, 1972, the statement (Ex. P.l.) of Smt. Kausalya was recorded by Sahifam (P.W.12) A.S.I., P.S. Sadar and on the basis of the aforesaid statement a case under section 307 I.P.C. was registered against the respondent at police station Sadar, Ganganagar. Samples of blood and the urine of Smt. Kausalya had been taken in the hospital on 26th March, 1972 and the same were duly sealed and were sent to the police station Sadar, Sri Ganganagar. The said samples were sent for chemical examination and according to the report (Ex.P.16)of the chemical examiner the blood and urine samples were negative for arsenic, antimony, mercury, Dhatura and opium and the blood samples were also negative for barbiturates, but the urine sample was positive for barbiturates. The statement of Smt. Kausalya was also recorded under section 164 Cr. P. C. before the Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Sri Ganganagar on 1st April, 1972 On 6th April, 1972, the respondent was arrested and at the time of his arrest the respondent produced a letter Ex. P. 2 written and signed by Smt. Kausalya where in it was stated that she was committing suicide. On 16t'n April, 1972 the house of the respondent was inspected and the site plan (Ex.P.6) and the memo of site inspection (Ex.P.6A) was prepared. After completing the investigation, the police filed a challan against the respo





















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