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.