2013 Supreme(Raj) 187
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Jaipur Bench
Banshi Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan (Sharma, J.)
HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.
Banshi Lal
Versus
State of Rajasthan
S.B. Cr. Appeal No. 184 of 1988, decided on 20.05.2013
Onkar Singh Lakhawat, for Appellant, who died on 17.3.2008 now represented by his wife Smt. Geeta Devi;
Peeyush Kumar, PP for State.
Headnote:Penal Code, Sec. 304 Part -II — Dispute over the staircase use which is common between both the parties — Accused appellant petted stones at the deceased — Sustained injuries and died during the course of investigation — Medical evidence that such injuries can be caused even by fall — Convicted for offence u/S. 304 Part II IPC — Held — Trial court has not considered the statement of witnesses properly — Not corroborated by medical evidence and other documents — Conviction in absence of corroboration cannot be sustained — Quashed and set aside. (Para 9)
Appeal allowed.
n.M lafgrk] /kkjk 304 Hkkx II & lhf<;ksa ds mi;ksx dks ysdj fookn tks nksuksa i{kdkjksa ds chp lk>k gS & vfHk;qDr vihykFkhZ us e`rd ij iRFkj QSads & pksVsa vk;h vkSj vUos"k.k ds nkSjku e`R;q gqbZ & fpfdRlh; lk{; fd ,slh {kfr;ka fxjus ls Hkh dkfjr gks ldrh gS & Hkk-n-la- dh /kkjk 304 Hkkx II ds ,slh {kfr;ka fxjus ls Hkh dkfjr gks ldrh gS & Hkk-n-la- dh /kkjk 304 Hkkx II ds rgr nks"k fl) fd;k & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & fopkj.k U;k;ky; us lk{khx.k ds lk{;ksa ij leqfpr :i ls fopkj ugha fd;k & fpfdRlh; lk{; o vU; nLrkostksa ls lEiq"V ugha & lEiq"Vh ds vHkko esa nks"kflf) fLFkj ugha dh tk ldrh & vfHk[kf.Mr ,oa vikLr dhA ¼in la[;k 9½
vihy Lohdkj dhA
"Heard on application. It is prayed in the application that appellant has expired and in his place his wife may be permitted to pursue the legal remedy. No objection has been raised from other side.
The application stands allowed. List on 18.2.2009."
In these circumstances the appellant who died on 17.3.2008 now represented by his wife Smt. Geetadevi, is heard through her counsel Mr. O.S. Lakhawat as permitted by this court on 10.2.2009. The public prosecutor has also not raised any objection for pursuing the remedy. In view of the order of this court the counsel for Smt. Geeta Devi was heard on 15.5.2013. The Public Prosecutor was also heard on behalf of the State. After hearing both the counsel the judgment in this case was reserved.
2. Brief facts as per the case of the prosecution is that a written report was presented before the Police Station Roopangarh by Smt. Manju wife of Dhan Prakash by caste Dholi resident of village Roopangarh Distt. Ajmer. In the report it was stated that on 18.4.1986 on the day of Ramnavmi at about 11.30 p.m. when her mother in law was standing near her boundary wall and at that time accused Banshilal who is neighbour was also standing on his roof of his house, at that time Banshilal stated that why her mother in law is breaking his wall. Her mother in law stated that she is maintaining her wall. On this Banshi started abusing her mother in law. Upon this Banshi lal's son in law Jagdish and his daughter Narangi and his wife Geeta pelted stones on her mother in law and her mother in law received injuries. She further stated that she started hurling and other persons in the nearby Gopal and his mother in law Sohani and Pappu Dholi came and at that time her mother in law was bleeding from the head. All these persons taken her mother in law to Hospital. It was prayed that action to taken against above persons who have pelted stones on her mother in law and on account of which she received injuries on her head. Upon receiving the above report FIR No. 27/1986 was registered for the offence under Sections 336, 323 read with section 34 IPC. The police started usual investigation and during investigation Smt. Kanchan died and the case was converted to section 302 IPC and the accused Banshilal was arrested. The charge sheet was filed for the offence under Section 302 IPC against the accused appellant and thereafter the case was committed to the court of sessions. The Sessions Judge Ajmer transferred the said case to the court of Addl. Sessions Judge Ajmer. The trial Court framed charge sunder section 302 IPC and the accused denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined 13 witnesses. The Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. After hearing both the sides the trial Court convicted the accused appellant for the offence under section 304 Part II IPC as mentioned above.
3. Mr. O.S. Lakhawat, learned counsel appearing for Smt. Geeta Devi representing the appellant has stated that the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 9.5.1988 is illegal and contrary to the factual position on record. The learned counsel has ar