Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
ARUN BHANSALI, RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI, JJ.
Sandeep Singh S/o Shri Dungar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1884 of 2017
Decided On : 17-01-2024
Ante Dating and Ante Timing of FIR - Criminal Law - 302, 323, 460, 147, 148, 149 IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act - The judgment discusses the ante dating and ante timing of the FIR, the contradictions in the statements of eyewitnesses, the lack of medical evidence corroborating the eyewitnesses' account, and the failure to connect the recovered bullet with the recovered pistol. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants and acquitted them of the charges.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction and sentencing of the appellants for various offenses including murder, based on a report submitted by the complainant alleging an attack on his brother. The appellants appealed the judgment, claiming that the trial court had not appreciated the evidence correctly and that there were unexplained delays and discrepancies in the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants. It highlighted the ante dating and ante timing of the FIR, contradictions in the statements of eyewitnesses, lack of medical evidence corroborating the eyewitnesses' account, and the failure to connect the recovered bullet with the recovered pistol. As a result, the court acquitted the appellants of the charges.
Issues: The issues included the reliability of the FIR, contradictions in the statements of eyewitnesses, lack of medical evidence corroborating the eyewitnesses' account, and the failure to connect the recovered bullet with the recovered pistol.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the ante dating and ante timing of the FIR, contradictions in the statements of eyewitnesses, lack of medical evidence corroborating the eyewitnesses' account, and the failure to connect the recovered bullet with the recovered pistol. These factors led the court to conclude that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the judgment was quashed and set aside, and the appellants were acquitted of the charges. The court ordered the release of the appellants from prison and required them to furnish personal and surety bonds in the event of filing a Special Leave Petition against the judgment.
JUDGMENT :
ARUN BHANSALI, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 06.11.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rajgarh, District Churu in Session Case No. 39/2014, whereby appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:
| Appellant No. 1 Sandeep Singh | |
| 148 IPC | One year’s simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation to further undergo three months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 323/149 IPC | Six month’s simple imprisonment. |
| 302 IPC | Imprisonment for Life with fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation to further undergo six months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 460 IPC | Ten years’ imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/- with default stipulation to further undergo three months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| Appellant No. 2 Jitendra Singh @ Dholu | |
| 148 IPC | One year’s simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation to further undergo three months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 323 IPC | Six month’s simple imprisonment. |
| 302/149 IPC | Imprisonment for Life with fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation to further undergo six months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 460 IPC | Ten years’ imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/- with default stipulation to further undergo three months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
2. The appeal was filed, inter-alia, by Sandeep Singh, Surat Singh and Jitendra Singh @ Dholu, however, during pendency of the appeal, appellant Surat Singh died and, therefore, on 02.09.2022, the appeal was ordered to be abated qua appellant Surat Singh.
3. Brief facts of the case as per the prosecution are that on 10.07.2014 at about 09:00 am, complainant Idrish S/o Ali Mohd. (PW-12) submitted a typed report (Exhibit-P/25) at Police Station Tara Nagar, District Churu alleging, inter-alia, that in the night of 09.07.2014 at around 11:30 pm, his brother, Mangilal @ Mangtu Khan called him through mobile phone of one Bajrang Saini of Tara Nagar, inter-alia, indicating that he was sitting at the hotel at Sahwa road and one Surat Singh of village Nyangali, came and asked him to remain sitting there and he took back his vehicle. His brother was apprehensive about his life and called him as soon as possible, on which the complainant alongwith Mehboob (PW-10) and Imran (PW-20) went over to the hotel at Sahwa road and while they were talking with Mangilal, Sandeep Singh, Surat Singh, Sher Singh, Sajjan Singh, Sumer Singh, Surjeet Singh, Driver Dholu Singh alongwith 20-25 persons having Lathis and iron rods in their hands, came there by three vehicles, alighted from the vehicles and entered into the hotel. Sandeep Singh shot fire from the pistol over the chest of his brother, on which he caught hold of Sandeep Singh from backside, where upon Sumer Singh inflicted Lathi blow over his back and head, as a result of which, Sumer Singh released him. At that time, manager of the hotel, namely, Pratap Singh and Bajranglal Saini, Mehboob, Imran and Mukesh Saini tried to caught hold of the accused by shouting, but accused threatened them with pistol and ran away while taking their vehicles. They took Mangilal to Govt. Hospital, Tara Nagar, from where he was referred to Churu Hospital, from where, he was referred to Bikaner, however, on the way to Bikaner Mangilal expired and as such they came back to Tara Nagar with dead body. It was alleged that accused have committed the occurrence in view of having land dispute between Mangilal and Sandeep Singh and prior to the said incident, Sandeep Singh had also attacked Mangilal and that dead body was lying in the mortuary and, therefore, action be taken.
4. On receipt of the typed report (Exhibit-P/25), a case vide FIR No. 215/2014 (Exhibit-P/26) was registered at Police Station Tara Nagar, for offences under Sections 302, 323, 460
Conviction set aside - FIR is ante-timed and there are no independent witness of the incident. Prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the appellants-accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Prosecution must prove criminal charges beyond reasonable doubt; conviction based on unreliable witness testimonies and flawed evidence is unsustainable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
