Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
SANGEET LODHA, VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR, JJ.
CHHOTU RAM — Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 555 of 2011
Decided on : 06-03-2018
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 374 CRPC - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE FOR OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 302/34 AND 341/34 IPC - CHALLENGE - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - CHAIN OF CIRCUMSTANCES - MOTIVE - RECOVERY OF ARTICLES - IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED - DISPUTE BETWEEN ACCUSED AND DECEASED - EVIDENCE OF WITNESSES - APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE - CONCLUSION OF TRIAL COURT - INTERFERENCE BY APPELLATE COURT.
Fact of the Case:
Accused-appellants were convicted and sentenced for offences under sections 302/34 and 341/34 IPC based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution alleged that the accused-appellants, Chhotu Ram and Sanjay Kumar, along with a juvenile Ram Kumar, strangled the deceased, Sardul Singh, near a railway line. The motive for the crime was stated to be a dispute between the deceased and Chhotu Ram over the repayment of a loan. The accused-appellants challenged the conviction and sentence, contending that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons, there was no last-seen evidence, and the recovery of articles was not properly proved.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that pointed towards the guilt of the accused-appellants. The court noted that there was a dispute between the deceased and Chhotu Ram over the repayment of a loan, and that the accused-appellants had been seen together with the deceased on the day of the occurrence. The court also found that the recovery of articles, including the deceased's Identity Card and blood-stained clothes, from the house of Chhotu Ram further strengthened the prosecution's case. The court rejected the contention of the accused-appellants that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons, noting that the accused-appellants were arrested the next day of the occurrence. The court also found that the evidence of witnesses, including PW3 Hardutt who saw the accused-appellants with the deceased on the day of the occurrence, was reliable.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that pointed towards the guilt of the accused-appellants. 2. Whether the recovery of articles, including the deceased's Identity Card and blood-stained clothes, from the house of Chhotu Ram was properly proved. 3. Whether the evidence of witnesses, including PW3 Hardutt who saw the accused-appellants with the deceased on the day of the occurrence, was reliable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that pointed towards the guilt of the accused-appellants. The court noted that there was a dispute between the deceased and Chhotu Ram over the repayment of a loan, and that the accused-appellants had been seen together with the deceased on the day of the occurrence. The court also found that the recovery of articles, including the deceased's Identity Card and blood-stained clothes, from the house of Chhotu Ram further strengthened the prosecution's case. The court rejected the contention of the accused-appellants that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons, noting that the accused-appellants were arrested the next day of the occurrence. The court also found that the evidence of witnesses, including PW3 Hardutt who saw the accused-appellants with the deceased on the day of the occurrence, was reliable.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals filed by the accused-appellants and upheld the judgment of the trial court.
Virendra Kumar Mathur, J.
These Criminal Appeals under section 374 CrPC has been preferred against order dated 18.06.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Hanumangarh Camp Nohar in Cr. Sessions Case No.12/2010 (11/2010) pertaining to FIR No.197/2010 registered at Police Station, Nohar, for offence under section 302 in the alternative 302/34 and section 341/34 IPC, whereby the accused-appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:
Offence under section 302/34 IPC
Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 6 months simple imprisonment
Offence under section 341/34 IPC
one month's simple imprisonment
2. Briefly stated, on 30.04.2010 a written report was submitted by Balveer Singh before SHO, Police Station Nohar, stating that his elder brother Sadul Singh was residing in his own house in Ward No.1 Dhani Sikhan. On 29.04.2010, he went for supplying milk in Nanda Colony at about 8:00PM. When he was returning back to his home, unknown persons strangulated him and cause his death near the outer signal of Railway line. He was informed early in the morning that dead body of Sardul Singh is lying at outer signal.
3. The SHO Police Station Nohar sent this report to the Police Station for registering FIR. One Constable Rai Singh went to the Police Station with this report and FIR No.197/2010 was registered at about 9:10AM on 30.04.2010. During investigation, the Investigation Officer prepared site-plans Ex.P2 and Ex.P2A and other memos - Ex.P4 Panchnama of dead body, Ex.P5 recovery memo of blood-smeared soil at the site, Ex.P6 recovery of 3 teeth from the site, Ex.P7 recovery of three Steel containers ('Burni'), Ex.P8 recovery of one 'safa' (turban) which was found wrapped around neck of deceased Sardul Singh, Ex.P9 recovery of bloodstained clothes of deceased Sardul Singh, Ex.P11 recovery of bunch of keys and one Identity Card of deceased Sardul Singh from accused Chhotu Ram, Ex.P12 recovery of blood-stained clothes from accused Sanjay Kumar and prepared map of recovery spots Exs.P14 & P14A. Body of the deceased was sent for autopsy.
4. After completion of investigation, challan was filed against Chhotu Ram, Sanjay and Ram Kumar. Accused Ram Kumar being minor, a separate regular Cr. Case No.30/2010 was registered against him before Juvenile Justice Board, Hanumangarh. In that case, after trial, juvenile Ram Kumar was acquitted of the charge of offence under sections 341, 302/34 IPC by giving him benefit of doubt vide judgment dated 27.01.2014.
5. During trial against accused-appellants Chhotu Ram and Sanjay Kumar, on behalf of the prosecution 9 witnesses were examined and documents Exhibits P1 to P39A were exhibited. Accused Chhotu Ram and Sanjay were examined under section 313 CrPC. Both the accused pleaded guilty and stated that they have been falsely implicated. Accused Sanjay stated that he never went to the house of Hardutt in 'jagran' nor does he know Hardutt and Hardutt has falsely implicated him. Both the accused did choose to examine any witness in their defence.
6. Learned trial court after hearing both the parties, passed the judgment under appeal dated 18.06.2011 whereby accused-appellants have been held guilty for offence under sections 302/34 and 341/34 IPC and sentenced as aforesaid.
7. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellants have preferred these appeals on various grounds. It was contended that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons and the appellant Chhotu Ram was tenant of deceased Sardul Singh, he has no enmity with the deceased and there is no motive for him to kill Sardul Singh. The Investigation Officer prepared site plan at 8:40AM while the FIR was registered at 9:10AM, hence, the investigation was started before lodging of the FIR. No motive has been shown in this ca
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
