IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, MUNNURI LAXMAN, JJ.
State of Rajasthan - Appellant
Versus
Lala Ram, S/o. of Ganesha and Ors. – Respondents
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 722 Of 2001
Decided On : 21-10-2024
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378 - Appeal against acquittal - The appellant-State challenged the acquittal of the accused under Sections 148 & 302 read with Section 149 IPC. The trial court's acquittal was upheld due to discrepancies in witness testimonies and timing of the incident, leading to doubts about the prosecution's case. The court emphasized the limited scope of appellate review in acquittal cases, requiring clear evidence of error or illegality for reversal. (Paras 14-19)
(B) Evidence - Credibility of witnesses - The court noted that the sole eyewitness's testimony was inconsistent with the FIR, raising doubts about its reliability. The court reiterated that the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and mere possibility of guilt is insufficient for conviction. (Paras 11-13)
ORDER :
1. This criminal appeal under Section 378 (3) & (1) Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant-State claiming the following relief:
2. The appellant-State laid a challenge to the judgment of acquittal dated 21.12.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, District Sirohi in Sessions Case No. 66/97 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Lala & Ors.), whereby the accused respondents were acquitted of the offences under Sections 148 & 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C.
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate has placed on record the status report dated 18.10.2024, which indicates that respondent No.6 Saroopa has expired.
4. Thus, this appeal is dismissed as having been abated to the extent of accused respondent No.6 Saroopa.
5. The matter pertains to an incident which had occurred in the year 1999 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 2001.
6. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-State, are that on 13.08.1997 at about 3:00 AM one Jabbar Singh gave an oral information at Police Station Paldi, that in his Village Radbar Bhagli at about 8:00 or 9:00 PM, Babra and his wife Pabu came to his house and informed him that father of Babra (Jora) and his brother (Lakhia) are missing, who were beaten by rebaris of village Radbar Bhagli. At about 10:00 AM, dead bodies of Jora and Lakhia were recovered and a written report was lodged by Jabbar Singh, wherein it was stated that on 12.08.1997 in between 9:00 and 10:00 PM, he was informed by Babra and his wife Pabu that when the father of Babra (Jora), brother Lakhiya and his wife Pabu were grazing the cattle, certain persons namely Lala, Virka, Deepa, Motiya & Prabhu belonging to the village Radbar Bhagli attacked Jora and Lakhiya with axe and lathies.
7. On the basis of the aforementioned information, an FIR was registered bearing registration No.114/1997 (Ex.P-85) at Police Station Paldi and the investigation commenced accordingly. After investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120-B, 201 & 302 of IPC against the accused respondents, and the trial commenced accordingly. Thereafter, learned Trial Court framed charges against the accused-respondents for the offences under Sections 148 & 302 read with 149 of IPC.
8. During the course of trial, the evidence of 24 prosecution witnesses were recorded amongst whom PW-4 (Pabu) was the eye-witness (upon whose testimony, the case of the prosecution has been raised); and certain documents were exhibited. Whereafter, the accused-respondents were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which the accused-respondents pleaded innocence and their false implication in the criminal case in question.
9. Thereafter, upon hearing the contentions of both the parties as well as considering the material and evidence placed on record, the learned Trial Court, acquitted the accused respondents, as above, vide the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 21.12.1999, against which the present appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-State.
10. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that testimony of PW-4 Pabu (eye-witness) is credible as she narrated the whole incident, wherein a particular community of rebaris attacked her father-in-law and brother-in-law due to some land dispute. He also submits that an accurate version has been given by PW-4 as weapons i.e. axe and lathies were also recovered and the same were specifically attributed as that Lala & Prabhu were having the a
Mallappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 1162/2011
Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 985/2010
The appellate court must demonstrate clear error or illegality to overturn an acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The judgment reinforces the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned unless there is clear evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in witness testimonies, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly when eyewitness testimony is unreliable.
The presumption of innocence remains until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal without clear evidence of error or illegality in the trial c....
The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless it finds a clear error or illegality in the trial court's judgment.
The judgment reinforces the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned unless there is clear evidence of error or misjudgment by the trial court.
The court upheld the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence and unreliable eyewitness testimonies, emphasizing the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
An appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and can only overturn an acquittal if the trial court's reasoning is perverse or unsupported by the evidence.
The judgment reinforces that an acquittal can only be overturned if the appellate court finds clear evidence of error or illegality in the trial court's decision.
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.