Back
2021 Supreme(Raj) 1238
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Sandeep Mehta, Manoj Kumar Garg, JJ.
Dhula – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1158 of 2016
Decided On : 10-08-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shambhoo Singh Rathore, Adv.
For the Respondent: Anil Joshi, PP
Headnote:
Criminal Procedural Code, 1973 – Section 374(2), 313 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 397, 302 - Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27 - Criminal appeal – Offence of Murder – Murdered with legs crushed with stones - Held, it has been established that the appellant- was taken into custody by the police and on the information given by him to the Investigating Officer under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the police seized the ornaments worn by the deceased - A test identification parade was held in which the recovered ornaments were duly identified by PW-1, son of the deceased, as belonging to the deceased. No plausible explanation for being found in possession of the said ornaments immediately after the murder has been given by the accused-appellant. The evidence on record clearly proves charges against the accused and point exclusively to his guilt and of none else – Court are, therefore, of the view that the incriminating links of circumstances proved by the prosecution against the appellant from a complete chain, which is consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt of the appellant. Each circumstance is incriminating in nature and the totality of circumstances conclusively establish the guild of the appellant – Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed by the accused appellant under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 21.09.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 100/2013 (C.I.S. No. 554/2014) whereby the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as under:-
| OFFENCE | PUNISHMENT |
| Section 302 IPC | Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months' additional rigorous imprisonment. |
| Section 397 IPC | 7 year's Simple Imprisonment |
2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. Brief facts of the case are that a written report (Ex. P/1) was filed by one Nathu Lal at the Police Station, Gogunda, Distt. Udaipur on 06.10.2011 stating therein that at about 1 O'clock, his mother Smt. Dhuli Bai, aged about 65 years, went for grazing buffaloes in the field of one Nana Lal. He was at the home till 4 O'clock. Thereafter, the complainant went to Amba Mata Temple. Their buffaloes returned home on their own at about 6 O'clock in the evening but his mother did not come back. His wife Smt. Geeta went to the field and searched but could not find Smt. Dhuli Bai. When the complainant returned home from the temple at about 7 O'clock, his wife told him that his mother had not returned home from the fields. The complainant, along with Padaa Meghwal, Heeralal Gurjar, Laxman Gurjar, Daulat Gurjar, Champa Gameti looked out in the fields, wells and forest to search his mother-Smt. Dhuli Bai. They found her slippers and veil in the field of Nana Lal Meghwal. On the western side, the dead body of Smt. Dhuli Bai was lying. The eyes of Smt. Dhuli Bai were punctured and her face was crushed by blows of stones. Her both legs were also crushed with stones. Both her legs had been chopped off and the silver rings and bangles worn on the feet and hands as well as the gold ear-rings worn in the nose, silver tops worn in the ears were missing. It was stated in the complaint that unknown persons killed her mother and looted the ornaments from her body.
4. On the basis of the said report, the Police registered an FIR No. 248/2011 for offences under Sections 302, 397 IPC and started investigation. During the investigation, the appellant was arrested. After usual investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the accused-appellant for offence punishable under Sections 302 & 397 IPC. The case was committed for trial to the court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Udaipur where the charges were framed against the accused-appellant. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. At the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 23 witnesses in all and exhibited 31 documents in documentary evidence. Thereafter, the statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. No witness was examined on the defence side. After conclusion of the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Udaipur vide judgment dated 21.09.2016 convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302, 397 IPC and awarded the sentences mentioned above.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence against the accused-appellant connecting him with commission of alleged offence. Learned counsel submitted that there is no evidence on record that the accused-appellant was last seen with the deceased. So far as the recovery of ornaments allegedly made by the police from the appellant, the ornaments were earlier shown to the witnesses so they could identify the ornaments. It is further argued that there is difference in the weight of the jewelry mentioned in the First Information Report and those recovered on the information of the accused. In nutshell, the learned counsel submitted that the r
