Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS, G.R. MOOLCHANDANI, JJ.
Sanjay Kumar son of Shri Hari Vallabh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No.639 of 2008
Decided on : 30-11-2016
G.R. MOOLCHANDANI, J.
The appellants have assailed impugned judgment passed by District and Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer dated 29/07/2008 in Sessions Case No.40/2006, by which accused-appellants have been convicted and sentenced under Section 302/34 IPC for life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/- failing which to undergo one month's simple imprisonment and have further been convicted under Section 392/34 for five years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/- failing which to undergo one month's simple imprisonment.
The contents of F.I.R, which has been lodged by Brij Vallabh on 12/05/2006 at Police Station Nachana, Jaisalmer briefly narrates :-
2- ^^lsok esa] Jheku iqfyl Fkkuk ukpukA fo"k; %& Jh jk.khnku th iq= Jh nsodh nkl th pkaMd dh gR;k djus ckcrA ekU;oj th] fuosnu gS fd eSa c`t oYyHk pkaMd e`rd Jh jk.khnku th dk NksVk HkkbZ gw¡A fnukad 07&05&06 dks ifjokj lfgr Jh y{ehukFk th efUnj ds igyh o"kZxkaB gksus ls ukpuk vk;s FksA dy fnukad 11&05&06 dks eSa o esjs ifjokj okys rFkk esjs cM+s HkkbZ gjh oYyHk th pkaMd gekjh xkM+h ysdj fnu dks 11-30 cts djhc tSlyesj ds fy, ?kj ls jokuk gq,A tSlyesj esa ge lHkh esjh cfgu ds ;gka :ds FksA ge tc ukpuk ls jokuk gq, rc ?kj ij esjs HkkbZ gjhoYyHk dk iq= lat;] mldh ifRu ljyk nsoh o esjs cM+s HkkbZ jk.khnku th ?kj ij gh FksA vkt fnu esa djhc 11-45 cts tSlyesj esa VsyhQksu ij lwpuk feyh fd vkids HkkbZ dh rfc;r cgqr [kjkc gS] rqjUr ukpuk igqaps o HkkHkh th dks Hkh lkFk ysrs vkosA jk.khnku th dh ifRu Hkh fnukad 10@05@06 dks tSlyesj xbZ FkhA rc ge nksuksa HkkbZ esjs ifjokj okys o esjh HkkHkh izseh nsoh pkaMd o mudh iq=h js[kk o tokbZ lk ijekuUn th jkBh lHkh nks xkfM+;ksa esa tSlyesj ls jokuk gksdj djhc 2-45 cts fnu dks ukpuk igqaps rks esjs cM+s HkkbZ Jh jk.khnku th dh yk'k ?kj ds vk¡xu esa iM+h Fkh] ftldks ns[kdj ifjokj okyksa us jksuk&ihVuk 'kq: dj fn;kA lat; dh ifRu Jhefr ljyk ?kj ij gh FkhA lat; ?kj ij ugha FkkA ljyk ls bl ckjs esa iwNus ij mlus dksbZ lUrks"ktud tokc ugha fn;kA bl ?kVuk dh og gh ,d ek= xokg gSA blls vUns'kk gS fd mls iw.kZ tkudkjh gksxhA ?kj ij b/kj&m/kj ns[kus ij dejksa esa lkeku fc[kjk gqvk utj vk;kA bl ij dejksa esa ns[kus ij uxnh] tsojkr vkfn tks esjh ekrkth ds j[ks gq, Fks] xk;c feysA lat; o equhe jktw ?kj ij o xkao ukpuk esa ugha feyus ds dkj.k eq>s vUns'kk gS fd bUgksaus gh uxnh o tsojkr ywVus dh xtZ ls esjs cM+s HkkbZ jk.khnku th dh gR;k dh gS ,oa /ku lEifr ysdj Qjkj gks x;s gSaA xk;c uxnh tsojkr dk iw.kZ fooj.k esjh ekrkth dks ekywe gS] os psUubZ jgrh gSA muds vkus ij bldk iw.kZ fooj.k is'k dj nwaxkA d`i;k bl ckjs esa mfpr dk;Zokgh djus dk d"V djsaA fnukad %& 12@05@2006 Hkonh;
Sd.
c`toYyHk pk.Md^^
The same was registered under Section 302/34 I.P.C. at Police Station Nachana.
3. Subsequent to the investigation, charge sheet was filed against both the accused-persons and they were tried under Section 302/34 and 392/34 and have been convicted and sentenced for the said offence as enumerated earlier, prior to challan, one of the accused Raju committed suicide at Korba, so proceeding did not commence against him.
4. Heard both the sides, learned counsel for appellants-accused has contended that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish alleged crime and nothing concrete has come in the prosecution evidence despite learned trial Court has erroneously passed the impugned judgment, it has also been contended that one of the accused Raju committed suicide and died during the course of trial, the case was established against him but nothing positive has come against appellant-accused Smt. Sarla wife of accused Sanjay and there is no iota of evidence that she ever conspired or acted under common intention to commit alleged offence, but she did not participate in the alleged offence and an interrogatory note is also indicative of the same. It has further been argued that appellant-accused Sanjay Kumar is nephew of the deceased and under such a close kinship alleged offence cannot be committed, so far as unbreached circumstantial evidence and link evide
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
