IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SANDEEP MEHTA, ABHAY CHATURVEDI, JJ.
Shyam Sunder @ Sundariya @ Samundra S/o Jagat Singh - Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 921 of 2016
Decided On : 20-12-2019
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 120B and 302 - Arms Act - Section 3/25 – Criminal Procedure Code 1973 - Section 313 - Criminal Trial - Offence of Murder – Appeal against conviction – Injuries/Wounds/Weapons - Alleging that on same day at about 4 O’ Clock in the evening, he, alongwith his cousin Virendra reached Sheetla Bazar, Rajgarh in a vehicle driven by PW-2 - At Sheetla Chowk, Virendra Singh got down from car and went to a barber’s shop - Informant was sitting on the rear seat - Virendra Singh had instructed them that car be brought back on which, Gyan Singh turned the car back from Masjid Road - Virendra Singh was seen coming back from barber’s shop and had reached Sheetla Chowk when, two boys came around on a red coloured Hero Honda motorcycle having registration number starting with the letters H.R. One of boys fired a gunshot on the back of Virendra due to which, he fell down - The other boy, fired a gun shot below ear of Virendra and then fired another gunshot on his head – Held, prosecution failed miserably in its duty to seek substantive evidence of identification of the accused when the statement of the witnesses were being recorded - Even if contradictions noted above are ignored for sake of arguments, for lack of substantive evidence of identification of the accused in the court during the testimony of the witnesses, it cannot be safely concluded that accused appellant was person responsible for firing the gunshot at deceased - Thus, conviction of accused appellant for charge under Section 302 IPC cannot be sustained - Prosecution has concealed nature of objections pointed by the FSL in Maalkhana articles while returning them to the police station, taints evidence of sealing of articles and thus, FSL report cannot be read in evidence - Consequently there remains no justification whatsoever so as to affirm conviction of appellant as recorded by trial court for the charge under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act - Appellant deserves to be acquitted by giving him benefit of doubt - Appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
MEHTA, J.
1. The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 03.09.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Churu in Sessions Case No.14/2013 (21/2009):
| Offences | Sentences | Fine | Fine Default sentences |
| Section 302 IPC | Life Imprisonment | Rs.2,000/- |
|
| Section 3/25 of the Arms Act | 1 Year’s | S.I. Rs.2,000/- | 1 Month’s S.I. |
| All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. | |||
2. Being aggrieved of his conviction and sentences, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C.
3. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted herein below:
4. One Shri Vijendra Singh (PW-6) lodged a written report (Ex.P/20) to the SHO, Police Station Rajgarh, District Churu on 06.02.2009 at 08.00 pm. alleging inter alia that on the same day at about 4 O’ Clock in the evening, he, alongwith his cousin Virendra reached Sheetla Bazar, Rajgarh in a vehicle driven by Gyan Singh. At the Sheetla Chowk, Virendra Singh got down from the car and went to a barber’s shop. The informant was sitting on the rear seat. Virendra Singh had instructed them that the car be brought back on which, Gyan Singh turned the car back from the Masjid Road. Virendra Singh was seen coming back from the barber’s shop and had reached the Sheetla Chowk when, two boys came around on a red coloured Hero Honda motorcycle having registration number starting with the letters H.R. One of the boys fired a gunshot on the back of Virendra due to which, he fell down. The other boy, fired a gun shot below the ear of Virendra and then fired another gunshot on his head. On seeing the attack, the informant and Gyan Singh (PW-2) got down from the vehicle. The assailants, ran away on the road going towards Nehru Bal Mandir School where an unnumbered Bolero car was parked with 5-6 persons in it. One of these boys, boarded the car and the other ran on foot and both managed to escape from the scene of occurrence. The informant alleged that the occupants of the car were also responsible for perpetrating the attack. The assailants abandoned their motorcycle while running away. A pair of shoes was also left behind by one of the assailants. Empty cartridges were lying at the spot. It was further alleged by the complainant that he could identify the assailants on seeing them again. Virendra Singh was taken to the hospital. The attack had been orchestrated by the Member of Parliament Shri Ram Singh Kaswan, Mahesh Fagedia and their family members by hatching a conspiracy. They bore enmity towards Virendra Singh who had contested the Legislative Assembly Election against the wife of Ram Singh Kaswan in the year 2008 and was preparing to contest the forthcoming General Election as well. It was further alleged that previously also, attacks had been made on Virendra Singh because of this political rivalry. An FIR had been lodged for these attacks against Billu, Pappu and Bindu, the nephews of Ram Singh Kaswan, who used his influence to get the attack perpetrated. On the basis of the report aforestated, an FIR No.43/2009 (Ex.P/21) came to be lodged at the Police Station Rajgarh for the offences under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149 and 120 IPC and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act.
5. The incident bore serious political overtones. Thus, under the directions of the Superintendent of Police, Churu, the investigation of the case was assigned to the Additional S.P., Churu Shri Kishan Sahay (PW-40). He carried out site inspection and prepared the site inspection plan (Ex.P/1) and the site inspection memo (Ex.P/1A). Blood stained soil was collected from the place of incident vide seizure memo (Ex.P/2). Control soil was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P/3). The blood stained T-shirt and trousers of the witness Gyan Singh were seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P/4). A 9mm2ZKF94 empty cartridge l
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.