Back
2022 Supreme(Raj) 199
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JODHPUR
SANDEEP MEHTA, SAMEER JAIN, JJ.
Santosh Kumar S/o Shri Shrawan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 229 of 2019
Decided On : 27-01-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : D.S. Thind, Sapna Vaishnav.
For the Respondent: R.R. Chhaprawal.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 374 – Appeal Against Convicted - Offence was exclusively triable - Recovered articles - Offence of Murder - On basis of this report an FIR came to be registered at Police Station District Bikaner for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and investigation was assigned to SHO - During course of investigation usual procedure viz. preparation of site inspection plan inquest memo etc was undertaken blood stained and control soil was collected from the spot - Dead body was got subjected to postmortem at PBM Hospital Bikaner - Statements of material witnesses were recorded - Accused appellant was arrested and acting in furtherance of information provided by him to Investigating Officer his own blood stained clothes and a stick were recovered - Recovered articles were forwarded to FSL for serological analysis for detection of blood etc and reports were received from FSL - After concluding investigation a charge-sheet came to be filed against the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC - As offence was exclusively triable by a Sessions court case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge Bikaner from where same was transferred for trial to Court of Additional Sessions Judge - Held, On a perusal of statement of the Medical Jurist which we have extensively referred to supra it becomes clear that not a single injury was caused on vital body parts of deceased viz. brain neck chest abdomen etc - All external injuries were found on her lower and upper limbs of wounds were associated with fractures cumulative effect whereof led to shock and death of the victim - No significant motive was attributed to accused regarding the assault - In a suggestion which was given to the Investigating Officer defence portrayed a theory that a dispute was going on between spouses owing to the efforts being made by his family members to marry off daughter of appellant and deceased - Even agreed in his cross-examination that they had fixed relation of in village but the accused did not agree on which the proposal was called off - It is quite possible that spouses might have quarreled on this issue because there was no other immediate motive for appellant to have assaulted his own wife - Court are in agreement with submission of learned counsel for appellant that while inflicting such injuries on the non-vital body parts as were described by Medical Jurist in postmortem report accused did not have any intention to cause death of his wife - Appeal is partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP MEHTA, J.
1. The appellant herein has preferred the instant appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. being aggrieved of the judgment dated 02.08.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 2, Bikaner (Camp Sri. Dungargarh), District Bikaner in Sessions Case No. 7/2014, whereby he has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo six months' simple imprisonment.
2. Briefly, the facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted as under:
Phoosa Ram (PW-3) submitted a written report (Ex.P/3) to the SHO, Police Station Seruna, District Bikaner on 28.02.2014 at 11.30 a.m. alleging inter-alia that his daughter Smt. Sua Devi was married to the appellant about 15 years ago. Ever since the marriage, the appellant used to indulge in harassing and humiliating Smt. Sua, for which numerous Panchayats were also convened. The family members also tried to counsel the appellant, but he did not relent from his vicious conduct. On the previous night at about 02.30 a.m. the appellant's brother Mohan Ram called the informant on his phone and told him that Santosh had excessively thrashed Smt. Sua and that she was being taken to hospital in a serious condition. On getting this information, the informant immediately rushed to the PBM Hospital, Bikaner and there, he came to know that his daughter Sua had passed away and her dead body was lying in the mortuary. He alleged that the appellant had beaten Smt. Sua to death.
3. On the basis of this report, an FIR No. 33/2014 (Ex.P/22) came to be registered at the Police Station Seruna, District Bikaner for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and investigation was assigned to SHO Mr. Surendra Kumar (PW-13). During the course of investigation, usual procedure, viz. preparation of the site inspection plan, inquest memo etc., was undertaken, blood stained and control soil was collected from the spot. The dead body of Smt. Sua was got subjected to postmortem at the PBM Hospital, Bikaner. Statements of the material witnesses were recorded. The accused appellant was arrested and acting in furtherance of the information provided by him to the Investigating Officer, his own blood stained clothes and a stick were recovered. The recovered articles were forwarded to the FSL for serological analysis for detection of blood etc. and reports Ex.P/33 and Ex.P/34 were received from the FSL. After concluding investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against the appellant herein for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. As the offence was exclusively triable by a Sessions court, the case was committed to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Bikaner, from where the same was transferred for trial to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, No. 2, Bikaner (Camp Sri. Dungargarh).
4. The trial court framed charge against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses and exhibited 57 documents and 14 articles to prove its case. The accused was confronted with the prosecution allegations in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. to which he offered a denial and claimed to be innocent. He specifically asserted that he was not present in his house on the day of the incident and was at Nokha at the relevant point of time. He returned home on coming to know that his wife had been injured. He feigned ignorance as to how she received the injuries.
5. After hearing the arguments advanced by the Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel and appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial court proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant as above by the impugned judgment dated 02.08.2019, which is assailed in this appeal.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently and fervently urged that there is no evidence on
