IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the need for corroboration and the benefit of doubt for the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this appeal may kindly be allowed and impugned judgment dated 11.12.2014 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Nathdwara in Sessions Case No. 11/2010 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the appellants may kindly be acquitted from all the offences.”

2. The accused-appellants laid a challenge to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.12.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nathdwara, (‘Trial Court’) in Sessions Case No.11/2010 (State of Rajasthan vs. Roop Singh & Ors.), whereby the accused-appellants have been convicted and sentenced as below:

3. Brief facts of this case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the accused-appellants, are that on 19.04.2010, one Kishan Singh (complainant) submitted a report before the Police Station, Khamnor stating that on the said date, he got an information that in the complainant’s well, a dead body of an unidentified person was floating, whereupon he reached the well.

3.1. It was further stated in the report that by that time, certain neighbours have also reached the place. When the said dead body was pulled out with the help of the other villagers, they found that there were two dead bodies – one female and other male – both of young age (around 30 years). Thus, in such circumstances, a doubt was raised, to the effect that after being killed by some unknown persons, their dead bodies were thrown in the well of the complainant.

3.2. On the basis of the aforesaid report, an FIR bearing FIR No.74/10 was lodged before the concerned Police Station against the unknown persons for the offences under Sections 302 & 201 IPC and the investigation commenced accordingly.

3.3. On 28.04.2010, the crime branch Ahmedabad Gujarat received information as to a group of persons roaming in the city with the purpose of causing theft (including the accused-Roop Singh and Uday Singh), thereafter in connection with the same, the said crime branch arrested the present accused- Roop Singh and Uday Singh alongwith some other persons under Section 41 Cr.P.C. in connection with different FIR.

3.4. During the course of interrogation the accused Roop Singh and Uday Singh, confessed of committing the murder of one Jaiti Bai and Kalu Singh, in the State of Rajasthan, and thereafter stealing ornaments, cash and other articles belonging to the deceased, along with one Bhagwan Lal. A receipt of sale of the ornaments was also found with accused- Roop Singh.

3.5. Thereafter, the information was forwarded to the S.H.O. Police Station, Khamnor and the present accused-appellants were handed over to the concerned police authorities. Subsequently, the investigation began and all circumstantial evidences were collected; whereafter, a charge-sheet was filed against the present accused-appellants under Sections 302/34, 201, 392, and 397 IPC.

3.6. The learned Trial Court framed the charges against the accused-appellants under the aforementioned provisions of IPC; the said charges were read over to the accused-appellants, which they denied and claimed to stand due trial, whereafter, the trial commenced accordingly.

3.7. During the course of trial, the prosecution produced 29 witnesses and 113 documents were exhibited