Back
2023 Supreme(Raj) 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SANDEEP MEHTA, KULDEEP MATHUR, JJ.
Ashok Kumar @ Sanwar Ram, S/o. Shri Jeevan Ram - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 201 Of 2016
Decided On : 11-01-2023
For the Appellant : Mr. J.S. Choudhary assisted by Ms. Sampatti Choudhary.
For the Respondent: Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, Mr. Vikas Bijarnia.
The prosecution must prove every link in the chain of circumstances by leading clinching evidence, and the circumstances should be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt and exclude every possible alternative hypothesis.
Headnote:
302 IPC - Life Imprisonment - 201 IPC - 3 Years’ RI - [302 IPC, 201 IPC/34] - The prosecution case was based purely on flimsy circumstantial evidence in form of motive and last seen. The theory of motive attributed by the prosecution to the accused appellant that he was involved in an illicit affair with his sister-in-law Smt. Teeja Devi is absolutely flimsy and concocted. The prosecution failed to lead credible evidence to prove the circumstance of last seen. The medical evidence contradicted the prosecution's claim that the accused strangled the victim and threw the dead body in the well. The prosecution theory regarding existence of illicit affairs inter se between the accused and Smt. Teeja Devi is a sheer piece of exaggeration. The prosecution case is based purely on conjectures and surmises. The findings recorded by the trial court in the impugned judgment for holding the accused guilty of the charges are based on surmises and conjectures and hence, the impugned judgment does not stand to scrutiny. The accused appellant is acquitted of the charges.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted and sentenced for offences under Section 302 IPC and Section 201 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the appellant was involved in an illicit affair with his sister-in-law and had murdered his wife. The deceased's body was found in a well, and the prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence to prove the charges.
Finding of the Court:
The prosecution failed to prove the alleged illicit affair and the circumstances of the crime. The medical evidence contradicted the prosecution's claim, and the court found the prosecution's case to be based on conjectures and surmises. The findings recorded by the trial court were based on surmises and conjectures and did not stand to scrutiny. The accused appellant was acquitted of the charges.
Issues: The main issues were the alleged illicit affair of the appellant with his sister-in-law, the circumstances of the crime, and the sufficiency of the evidence to prove the charges.
Ratio Decidendi: The prosecution must prove every link in the chain of circumstances by leading clinching evidence. The circumstances should be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt and exclude every possible alternative hypothesis. The prosecution's case must be of a conclusive nature and tendency, leaving no reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused.
Final Decision: The judgment convicting the appellant was quashed and set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of the charges. The accused appellant was directed to furnish a personal bond and a surety bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each, effective for a period of six months, in case of filing of a Special Leave Petition against the judgment.
JUDGMENT :
[Sandeep Mehta, J.]
1. The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 12.01.2016 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Merta in Sessions Case No.52/15 (20/12):-
| Offence under Section | Sentences | Fine | Sentence in lieu of default of payment of fine |
| 302 IPC | Life Imprisonment | Rs.50,000/- | 6 Months’ Additional R.I. |
| 201 IPC | 3 Years’ RI | Rs.10,000/- | 1 Month’s additional RI |
| Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. | |||
2. Briefly stated facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted herein below:-
Shri Asharam (PW.4) submitted a written report (Ex.P/4) to the SHO PS Degana on 03.06.2012 alleging inter alia that his two daughters Sampu Devi and Chhoti Devi had been married to Kailash and Sanwar Ram @ Ashok, sons of Jeevan Ram respectively. A male offspring was born to Smt. Chhoti Devi from her wedlock to Ashok. For the last 4-5 years, the matrimonial relatives i.e., her husband, sister-in-law and brother-in-law had been maltreating Smt. Chhoti Devi. She was often beaten up and turned out of the house. Once, her husband tried to kill her. The informant would often convene Panchayats for pacifying the accused and for settling the strife. However, Ashok Kumar was indulged in an illicit affair with his sister-in-law Smt. Teeja Devi and thus, he did not desist from his foul behaviour and often insinuated that he was not desirous of keeping Smt. Chhoti Devi and would kill her. Four months ago, strife took place between the accused and Smt. Chhoti Devi on which, the complainant went to Chhoti Devi’s matrimonial home and tried to settle the matter. On 01.06.2012, his daughter Chhoti Devi had gone to the field at about 9 O’ Clock in the morning. The accused Ashok @ Sanwar Ram, Jethani Smt. Teeja Devi and brother-in-law Hari Ram followed her. They strangled her in the room constructed near the well and threw the dead body inside the well, covered it and put stones thereupon. Thereafter, the accused called the complainant and conveyed that his daughter had gone missing. The accused took the complainant and his family members to the well on 02.06.2012 late in the afternoon and when the complainant and his family members looked inside, they could see the dead body and police were informed. However, darkness had fallen and thus, the dead body could be taken out in the morning on 03.06.2012. It was alleged that Ashok Kumar, Teeja Devi and Hari Ram killed Smt. Chhoti Devi by strangling her and threw the dead body in the well.
3. On basis of this report, an FIR No.141/2012 (Ex.P/18) came to be registered at the Police Station Degana for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the IPC and investigation was commenced. The dead body of Smt. Chhoti Devi was subjected to autopsy by a Medical Board constituted at the Government Hospital, Degana which carried out the procedure and issued a post-mortem report (Ex.P/18). The Board opined that the cause of death of Smt. Chhoti Devi was obstruction caused to the respiratory tract owing to pressure on neck associated with other ante-mortem injuries which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.
4. Spot proceedings were carried out. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Smt. Sampu Devi, being the younger sister of the deceased and the sister-in-law of the accused appellant alleged that the accused was involved in an extra-marital affair with her sister-in-law Smt. Teeja Devi and that he used to maltreat Chhoti Devi on this account. Chhoti Devi had gone to the field on the day of the incident. The accused Ashok followed her and killed her. The accused-appellant was arrested on 04.06.2012 and since then, he continues to be in custody. A charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused appellant Ashok Kumar in the Court of magistrate concerned for the offences punishable under Sections 30
