Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mohammad Rafiq, Vijay Kumar Vyas, JJ.
Manna Lal - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1775 of 2007
Decided On : 03-06-2016
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - [SECTIONS 302, 34 IPC] - CONVICTION - EVIDENCE - EYE WITNESSES - HOSTILE - IMPROVED AND CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS - RECOVERIES - WEAPON OF OFFENCE - BLOOD STAINED CLOTHES - MOTIVE - LACKING - APPEAL ALLOWED - APPELLANT ACQUITTED.
Fact of the Case:
Appellant Manna Lal was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Suresh. The prosecution alleged that the appellant and another person, Rajesh, killed Suresh with a sword. Two eye witnesses, Shreelal and Parmanand, were named in the FIR, but Shreelal turned hostile and Parmanand's testimony was found to be unreliable. The prosecution also relied on the recoveries of a blood-stained sword and clothes from the appellant's house, but the FSL report did not find any human blood on the sword and the appellant's blood group was not determined. The appellant denied the charges and claimed that he was at his in-laws' village at the time of the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of the eye witnesses was not credible and that the recoveries of the sword and clothes were not sufficient to prove the appellant's guilt. The court also noted that there was no evidence of motive and that the appellant had an alibi for the time of the incident. The court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellant.
Issues: 1. Whether the evidence of the eye witnesses was credible. 2. Whether the recoveries of the sword and clothes were sufficient to prove the appellant's guilt. 3. Whether there was evidence of motive. 4. Whether the appellant had an alibi for the time of the incident.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the evidence of the eye witnesses was not credible because Shreelal turned hostile and Parmanand's testimony was found to be unreliable. 2. The court held that the recoveries of the sword and clothes were not sufficient to prove the appellant's guilt because the FSL report did not find any human blood on the sword and the appellant's blood group was not determined. 3. The court held that there was no evidence of motive because none of the prosecution witnesses corroborated the appellant's alleged enmity with the deceased. 4. The court held that the appellant had an alibi for the time of the incident because he was at his in-laws' village at the time of the incident.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant.
V.K. Vyas, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by appellant Manna Lal aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 10.10.2007 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Chhabra, District Baran, in Sessions Case No.93/2006, whereby the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellant for the offence u/s 302 for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- ; in default of payment thereof, to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.
2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 13.9.2006 at about 6.30 A.M., complainant Gangaram S/o Shri Narayan Meena R/o Bardawada, accompanied by his brother Hajari Lal, submitted a written report (Ex.P-1) to Shri Jodha Ram, SHO, Police Station Chhibabarod, camp at Chandwardi, Eklera Road, to the effect that today morning at about 5.30 AM, Rajesh S/o Shri Kastoor Chand Meena R/o Bardawada came to his house and taken away his son Suresh for jogging to a Nala towards Chaunch Badi. Rajesh and Manna Lal - Master S/o Shri Dev Lal Meena, R/o Bardawada killed his son Suresh by sword. Shreelal S/o Shri Dev Lal, R/o Bardawada and Parmanand S/o Shri Dhanna Lal Meena, R/o Kolukheda have seen the occurrence. Dead body of Suresh is lying at the spot. On receipt of this information, SHO found the dead body lying in an agricultural field. On inspection, a bleeding wound on left side of neck, a bleeding wound in front of neck, a bleeding wound on left ear, three wounds of cut on fingers of left hand were found and the dead body was completely blood stained. SHO endorsed the report (Ex.P-1) accordingly and sent it for registration of formal FIR to the police station through constable Anil Singh. On the same day at about 7.15 A.M., formal FIR No.282/2006 was registered at Police Station Chhepabarod. During investigation, an inquest of dead body (Ex.P-2), site inspection memo (Ex.P-3), memo of handing over the dead body to the complainant Ganga Ram (Ex.P-4), Memo of taking photography (Ex.P-5), memo of photography of dead body (Ex.P-6), memo of seizure of blood smeared soil (Ex.P-7), memo of blood stained grass and control soil (Ex.P- 8) and seizure memo of shirt and Baniyan stained with blood found on the dead body (Ex.P-9) were prepared in presence of witnesses - Morpal (PW-3) and Durga Lal (PW-6). After recording statements u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of the witnesses, accused appellant was arrested on 15.9.2006 vide memo of arrest (Ex.P-22). While in custody, the accused appellant Manna Lal gave an information that he had hidden a sword in his house, which he wanted to get recovered. The information u/s 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, was recorded vide memo (Ex.P-23). The sword having blood stains was recovered vide memo (Ex.P-10). Site memo of place of recovery of sword (Ex.P-11) also prepared. Postmortem of the dead body was conducted vide memo (Ex.P-50). Seized articles were deposited in Malkhana of police station, wherefrom, they were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. FSL report (Ex.P-51) was obtained. After completing investigation, charge-sheet against the appellant was filed before Judicial Magistrate, Chhipabarod, for the offence punishable u/s 302 and 34 IPC and a separate charge-sheet was also filed before the Juvenile Justice Board, Kota against another - Rajesh Meena, being juvenile. The Judicial Magistrate, Chhipabarod committed the case for trial to Additional Sessions Judge, Chhabra, wherefrom, the case was transferred to the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Chhabra, District Baran.
3. Learned trial court examined 23 witnesses produced on behalf of prosecution. The accused appellant was examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The accused appellant replied that the prosecution has submitted wrong evidence. Due to enmity, he was implicated in this matter. He was working as Lab. Assistant. On 12.9.2006, he was on duty from 7-00 to 12.00 O'clock. Thereafter, he traveled in a bus for in-laws house at Moreli (Iklera) village. There,
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
