IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Pankaj Bhandari, Bhuwan Goyal, JJ.
Dashrath Singh son of Shri Mal Singh and ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan through P.P. - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 375 of 2000, D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 331 of 2004
Decided On : 23-02-2024
Criminal Appeal - Conviction and Sentence - Section 148 IPC, Section 302 and 302/149 IPC - Pappu @ Ramlal Versus State of Rajasthan: (2017) 2 RLW 1466, Mushtaq & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan: 2015 SCC OnLine Raj 10215, Umar s/o Kamal Khan Versus State of Rajasthan: (2014) 4 RLW 3685, Jang Singh & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan: (2001) 9 SCC 704, Chotkau Versus State of U.P.: (2023) 6 SCC 742, Lahu Kamlakar Patil & Anr. Versus State of Maharashtra: JT 2012 (12) SC 607, Kanakarajan @ Kanakan Versus State of Kerela: JT 2017 (4) SC 407, B. Virupakshaiah Versus State of Karnataka & Ors.: JT 2016 (2) SC 239, State of Uttar Pradesh Versus Om Pal & Ors.: JT 2018 (6) SC 97, Bhaskarrao & Ors. Versus State of Maharashtra: JT 2018 (6) SC 153, Jitendra Kumar Mishra @ Jittu Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh: Criminal Appeal No. 1348 of 2011 with Criminal Appeal No. 1347 of 2011 decided by the Apex Court on 05.01.2024
Fact of the Case:
The appeals involved convictions under Section 148 IPC, Section 302 and 302/149 IPC. The case revolved around an incident where a cream coloured jeep hit a motorcycle, leading to a fatal attack on the victim. The prosecution relied on dying declarations, witness testimonies, and recovery of weapons to establish the guilt of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the dying declarations and witness testimonies were unreliable due to inconsistencies and lack of corroboration. The recovery of weapons did not conclusively link the accused to the crime. The Court also highlighted the criminal background of key witnesses, casting doubt on their credibility. Consequently, the Court acquitted the accused of all charges.
Issues: The key issues included the reliability of dying declarations, witness testimonies, and weapon recovery, as well as the criminal background of witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the need for reliable and corroborative evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It also underscored the importance of considering the criminal background of witnesses and the lack of conclusive evidence linking the accused to the crime.
Final Decision: The Court acquitted the accused appellants - Dashrath Singh, Mahaveer Singh, and Kripal Singh of all charges, citing the unreliability of evidence and lack of conclusive proof linking them to the crime.
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Bhandari, J.
1. Present D.B. Criminal Appeal No.375/2000 titled as Dashrath Singh & Anr. Versus State of Rajasthan has come up before this Court for hearing in pursuance of the remand order dated 03.08.2011 passed by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.352 of 2008 & remand order dated 23.01.2012 passed by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.1550 of 2009 whereby the Apex Court has allowed the appeals filed by Dashrath Singh and Mahavir Singh and has set aside the order of the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court dated 18.07.2006 and has remanded the case back to this Court for re-decision qua the appellants herein. The appeal was filed by the appellants – Dashrath Singh and Mahavir Singh aggrieved by the judgment and sentence dated 18.05.2000 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Jaipur in Sessions Case No.01/1998, whereby appellant-Dashrath Singh was convicted for offence under Section 148 IPC and Section 302 and 302/149 IPC. For offence under Section 148 IPC, he has been sentenced for two years rigorous imprisonment and for offence under Section 302 and 302/149 IPC, he has been sentenced for life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. Appellant-Mahavir Singh was convicted for offence under Section 147 IPC and Section 302/149 IPC. For offence under Section 147 IPC, he has been sentenced for one year rigorous imprisonment and for offence under Section 302/149 IPC, he has been sentenced for life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.
2. D.B. Criminal Appeal No.331/2004 titled as Kripal Singh Versus State of Rajasthan has been filed by appellant – Kripal Singh aggreived by the judgment and sentence dated 28.01.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Sessions Case No.127/2001 whereby appellant – Kripal Singh has been convicted for offence under Section 302/120-B of IPC and sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months imprisonment.
3. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that on 29.12.1997 complainant – Raju Nayak submitted a written report at Police Station Jhotwara wherein he has stated that today at 08:15 AM Rajendra Grover came to his home by motor-cycle and they were discussing about the cricket match. In the meantime, a cream coloured jeep came from Adarsh Vidya Mandir side and hit the motor-cycle, due to which, complainant and Rajendra Grover fell down. They immediately ran away from there, but Dilip Singh, Dashrath Singh, Mahavir and Sunil Bihari and 5-6 other persons came out from the jeep. They were carrying weapons like lathi, sword, pharsi and pistol and they ran after Rajendra and started beating Rajendra Grover. On the said report, FIR bearing No.563/1997 was lodged for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 324, 323 and 341 of IPC and investigation was initiated. During investigation, Rajendra Grover died at the hospital.
4. The police after completion of the investigation has filed challan against accused – Dilip Singh, Dashrath Singh, Mahavir Singh, Sudepal Singh, Dewan Singh, Khem Singh, Ravindra Singh, Rajveer Singh, Damodar, Kripal Singh and Santu Sharma. Trial Court framed charges against 10 accused persons. Accused denied the charges and claimed trial. Out of the 10 accused persons, one Santu Sharma, against whom challan has been filed under the provisions of Section 299 Cr.P.C. for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302/34 and 120-B of IPC, was acquitted by giving benefit of doubt and the other nine accused were convicted by the learned Trial Court.
5. D.B. Criminal Appeal was preferred by nine accused persons. Division Bench of the High Court acquitted six accused – Khem Singh, Sudepal, Diwan Singh, Rajveer Singh, Ravindra Singh and Damodar Singh and convicted 3 accused na
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for reliable and corroborative evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving witness testimoni....
Prosecution has failed to prove charges levelled against accused persons under Sections 302/34, 201 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act by any reliable, cogent and independent evidence to hilt beyond reas....
Conviction based on dying declarations requires proof of their voluntariness and truthfulness; inconsistencies create reasonable doubt undermining the prosecution's case.
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.
In cases involving multiple dying declarations, inconsistencies must be critically examined, and the declaration recorded by a Magistrate is typically given more weight, particularly when the reliabi....
Murder – Minor contradictions do not affect prosecution case.
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.