IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JODHPUR
SANDEEP MEHTA, SAMEER JAIN, JJ.
Chhotulal S/o Nanda – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1309 of 2017
Decided On : 27-01-2022
Evidence Act - Section 27 – Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 374(2) Appeal Against Conviction - On basis of this report FIR came to be registered at Police Station District for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 307 IPC and investigation was commenced - I.O. proceeded to place of incident prepared Site Inspection Plan, etc - Injured who had been taken Hospital was operated upon but he did not survive and passed away on very same dayat about Clock - His dead body was subjected to postmortem General Hospital by who took note of various injuries on the body of the deceased. Lacerated wounds were present on both legs which were bearing deformities associated with fractures - Left arm was also deformed and was fractured - A few abrasions were also noticeable on body - Cause of death was opined to be hemorrhagic shock owing to cumulative effect of injuries to the abdomen and other injuries which were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death - Held, Therefore court have no hesitation in holding that trial court committed a grave factual error in placing implicit reliance on testimony of the prosecution witnesses referred to supra that deceased made an oral dying declaration before them that he had been assaulted by the appellants - Evidence of oral dying declaration is not reliable and hence no credence can be given thereto - Other than that no significant evidence was led by the prosecution so as to establish complicity of the appellants in the crime - In wake of a threadbare analysis of prosecution evidence court are of firm opinion that prosecution has failed to lead cogent and clinching evidence sufficient to bring home guilt of appellants - Exercise of evaluation of evidence undertaken by trial court and conclusions drawn in impugned Judgment for convicting appellants are not based on an apropos appreciation of evidence available on record - Hence impugned Judgment cannot be sustained - Appeal is Allowed.
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP MEHTA, J.
1. The appellants herein have been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 06.02.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 02/2013:
| Offences | Sentences | Fine | Fine Default sentences |
| Section 120B IPC | 10 Years' R.I. | Rs. 3,000/- | 3 Months' R.I. |
| Section 302 IPC | Life Imprisonment | Rs. 5,000/- | 3 Months' R.I. |
2. Being aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, the appellants have 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. Smt. Rekha (PW-3) lodged a written report (Ex.P/4) to the SHO Police Station Hamirgarh, District Bhilwara on 09.09.2012 alleging inter-alia that her husband Amra had gone to the Banas river for loading a water tanker at 07.00 A.M. He had loaded the tanker from the well of Radheshyam Keer and was returning. On his way back, Chhotulal son of Nanda Gujar and Gopal son of Nanda Gujar, obstructed Shri Amra and thrashed him with an iron tami due to which, he received serious injuries on his hands, legs and abdomen. Upon getting the information, she, her brother-in-law Kanaji and Foolji Suthar, took the injured to the Bhilwara hospital where, he disclosed the details of the assault to the informant and his brother Kishan. It was further alleged that as the condition of Shri Amra was quite serious, he was referred to Udaipur for further treatment.
5. On the basis of this report, FIR No. 151/2012 (Ex.P/39) came to be registered at the Police Station Hamirgarh, District Bhilwara for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 307 IPC and investigation was commenced. The I.O. proceeded to the place of the incident, prepared the Site Inspection Plan, etc. The injured Shri Amra, who had been taken to Maa Gayatri Hospital, Udaipur, was operated upon but he did not survive and passed away on the very same day i.e. 09.09.2012 at about 10 O' Clock. His dead body was subjected to postmortem (Ex.P/40) at the Maharana Bhupal General Hospital, Udaipur by Dr. Manish Kumar Sharma (PW-39) who took note of various injuries on the body of the deceased. Lacerated wounds were present on both the legs which were bearing deformities associated with fractures. The left arm was also deformed and was fractured. A few abrasions were also noticeable on the body. The cause of death was opined to be haemorrhagic shock owing to cumulative effect of injuries to the abdomen and the other injuries, which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. As Shri Amra passed away, the offence under Section 302 IPC was applied to the case. The appellants were arrested and acting in furtherance of the informations provided by them to the I.O. under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, an iron tami and a wooden stick were recovered from the accused Chhotulal and Gopal vide seizure memos (Ex.P/18 and Ex.P/19) respectively.
After concluding the investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused appellants and one Kishanlal Gujar for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120B IPC. As the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC was Sessions triable, the case was committed to the court of Sessions Judge, Bhilwara from where, the same was transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Bhilwara for trial. The trial court framed charges against the accused appellants and Kishanlal for the offences punishable under Sections 120B IPC and Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC. The appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 39 witnesses and exhibited 59 documents and marked 11 articles to prove its case. The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and upon being confronted with the circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution evid
Murder – Non-examination of Doctor who conducted autopsy on dead body of deceased and who prepared post-mortem report is not fatal to case of prosecution.
The reliability and consistency of dying declarations are crucial in criminal cases, especially when multiple contradictory declarations are present.
The main legal point established is the necessity for a dying declaration to be voluntary, coherent, consistent, and free from suspicious circumstances. The court emphasized the need for corroboratio....
Dying declaration – Once court is satisfied that dying declaration is true and voluntary, it can base conviction on it without corroboration – It is not plurality of dying declarations that matters.
The need for circumstances to be fully established and consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, and the requirement for corroboration of an oral dying declaration by other ind....
Dying declarations must be corroborated by reliable evidence; significant contradictions in witness testimonies undermine their credibility, impacting the validity of the conviction.
The reliability of an eyewitness is paramount, and without corroboration, their testimony cannot solely sustain a conviction in criminal jurisprudence.
The court relied on oral and documentary evidence to establish the guilt of the accused under Section 302 IPC.
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.