2014 Supreme(Raj) 894
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Govind Mathur, Atul Kumar Jain, JJ.
Pyarelal & Anr. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 328 of 2006.
Decided On : 31-01-2014
For the Appellants:Manish Dadhic and M.K. Garg, Advocates.
For the State: K.R. Bishnoi, Public Prosecutor.
Mere participation in a crime is not sufficient to establish common intention; there must be evidence of a pre-arranged plan or pre-meeting of minds between the participants to cause the death of the victim.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - SECTION 302 INDIAN PENAL CODE - COMMON INTENTION - SECTION 302/34 INDIAN PENAL CODE - EVIDENCE - EYE WITNESSES - RECOVERY OF WEAPON - BLOOD STAINS - CONTRADICTIONS - IMPROVEMENT OF CASE - MINOR DIFFERENCES - INFERENCE OF COMMON INTENTION - PRE-ARRANGED PLAN - PRE-MEETING OF MINDS - PARTICIPATION IN CRIME - APPREHENSION OF FATAL INJURIES - ERRONEOUS CONVICTION.
Fact of the Case:
Accused Pyarelal was convicted for murder under Section 302 IPC, and accused Fateh Chand was convicted for murder with common intention under Section 302/34 IPC. The prosecution's case was that the accused, along with others, beat and stabbed the deceased, Prabhu Dayal, to death in a temple. The defense argued that the prosecution's story was full of contradictions and improbabilities, and that the accused were falsely implicated.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of the eye witnesses, Smt. Jhanwari Devi and Kaluram, was reliable and consistent. The court also found that the recovery of the weapon of offense, a knife with blood stains of human origin, connected the accused to the crime. The court held that accused Pyarelal was guilty of murder under Section 302 IPC, but that accused Fateh Chand's conviction for murder with common intention under Section 302/34 IPC was erroneous.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the murder of Prabhu Dayal? 2. Whether accused Fateh Chand participated in the crime in furtherance to the common intention with Pyarelal?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused Pyarelal committed the murder of Prabhu Dayal. The court relied on the evidence of the eye witnesses, the recovery of the weapon of offense, and the absence of any explanation from the accused about the blood stains on the knife. 2. The court held that accused Fateh Chand's conviction for murder with common intention under Section 302/34 IPC was erroneous. The court found that there was no evidence of a pre-arranged plan or pre-meeting of minds between the accused to cause the death of Prabhu Dayal. The court also found that there was no evidence that Fateh Chand had any apprehension that Pyarelal would return with a knife to stab Prabhu Dayal.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the conviction of accused Pyarelal for murder under Section 302 IPC and the sentence awarded to him. The court set aside the conviction of accused Fateh Chand for murder with common intention under Section 302/34 IPC and acquitted him.
JUDGMENT
1. - Learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Bikaner, by judgment dated 28.2.2006, convicted accused Pyarelal for the offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and accused Fateh Chand for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code. Both the accused were sentenced to undergo life term imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- each and further to undergo one month's additional imprisonment in the event of default in payment of fine.
2. The case of the prosecution is that Shri Jetharam Mali was having six sons viz. Pyarelal, Kishanlal, Fateh Chand, Bishanlal, Prabhu Dayal (deceased) and Jesram. Jesram left the house on becoming saint. Shri Bishanlal and-2- Prabhu Dayal were having dispute with Pyarelal, Kishanlal and Fateh Chand in relation to partition of immovable property that was in the name of their father Shri Jetharam. On 3.3.2004, a statement made by Smt. Jhanwari Devi wife of Prabhu Dayal before the police was reduced in writing (Ex.P/4) and on basis of that a first information report (Ex/P/8) was lodged at police station Gangashahar. As per the statement made, Shri Prabhu Dayal, husband of Smt. Jhanwari Devi at about 2 - 2:15 PM went to the temple to have water in a bucket. Pyarelal, Kishanlal and Fateh Chand, who were already present in the temple gave beating to Prabhu Dayal with fist and kicks. Hearing cry made by Shri Prabhu Dayal, Jhanwari Devi rushed to the temple, where she found Kishanlal and Fateh Chand were holding both the hands of Prabhu Dayal. Smt. Durga was also present there and she instigated Pyarelal to kill Prabhu Dayal. Pyarelal abruptly went to a room and returned with a knife. He gave 2-3 knife blows to Prabhu Dayal in his abdominal region. In the meantime, Arjun also came there and he too gave beating to Prabhu Dayal. Hearing hue and cry around, the assailants fled from the spot. Smt. Jhanwari Devi then brought a taxi and carried the injured to hospital with Kaluram and Santosh. At hospital, Prabhu Dayal was declared dead.
3. On basis of the information, the investigation agency lodged a criminal case and proceeded with investigation. Accused persons were arrested on 3.3.2004 itself. On 5.3.2004 a disclosure was made by accused Pyarelal to the effect that he want to get the knife-3- recovered which was hidden by him after washing it. On basis of the information, knife was recovered as per document Ex.P/4 on 6.3.2004. The knife along with blood stained wearings of deceased Prabhu Dayal were sent for their serological examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is available on record as Ex.P/19. As per the report of Forensic Science Laboratory (Ex.P/19) the knife and the clothes were having blood stains of human origin. The blood group of the stains on the knife remained inconclusive, obvious so being washed.
4. The prosecution, after getting the investigation completed by the investigating agency, filed a police report before the court. The court after hearing the accused persons viz. Pyarelal, Kishanlal and Fateh Chand, framed a charge for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code. The trial commenced as desired by the accused persons on denial of the charge. During the course of trial, accused Kishanlal died, thus, the proceedings stood abated qua him.
5. The prosecution supported its case with the aid of 11 witnesses, out of whom Smt. Jhanwari Devi (PW-2) and Kaluram (PW-4) were cited as eye witnesses. The recovery of knife at the instance of accused Pyarelal was supported by Shri Mohanlal (PW-5), an independent witness and Shri Kaluram (PW-4). Suffice to mention that Shri Kaluram happens to be the son of Shri Bishanlal, brother of-4- deceased and accused persons. Dr. O.P.Saini (PW-10) adduced medical evidence being a member of the medical board that conducted autopsy on the corpus of Shri Prabhu Dayal. Shri Anil Sharma (PW-11) narrated all the ste
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
