SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Raj) 433

Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench
Honble SHIV KUMAR SHARMA & FATEH CHAND BANSAL, JJ.
Khema Ram & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondents
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 324 of 1999
Decided On : May 12, 2003

Advocates Appeared:
S.R. Bajwa, Sr. Advocate with V.P. Bishnoi, for Appellants B.M. Sharma, Public Prosecutor for State Biri Singh, for Complainant

Headnote:Evidence Act, 1872, Sec. 106, Penal Code Secs. 302/49, 148, 201, 364, 379 – Presumption – Abduction of the deceased in the evening by the appellants – Dead body was found in the morning of nextday – Trial Court convicted – Held – In the appropriate cases the Court can draw presumption that the abductors themselves could be the killers of the abducted victim, unless they explain otherwise as to what they did with the prey – The abductors withheld the information from the Court – There is every justification for drawing the inference in the light of all proceeding and succeeding circumstances that they are the murders of the deceased. (Paras 15, 18 & 21)

       Section 106 would apply to cases where prosecution has succeeded in proving facts for which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding the existence of certain other facts, unless the accused failed to offer any explanation which might drive the court to draw a different inference. (Para 19)

Honble SHARMA, J.–The nine appellants were placed on trial before learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 20/97 for having committed murder of Ram Lal. Learned Sessions Judge vide judgment dated May 18, 1999 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:-

(1) Babu Lal s/o Chhaju Ram & (2) Chhaju Ram:

U/s. 302/149 IPC To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to further suffer Six Months Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 148 IPC To suffer One Year Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer One Month Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 201 IPC To suffer Five Years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- , in default to further suffer. Three months Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 364 IPC To suffer Seven Years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer. Three Months Rigorous Imprisonment.

(3) Murlidhar:

U/s. 302/149 IPC To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to further suffer Six Months Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 148 IPC To suffer One Year Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer One Month Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 201 IPC To suffer Five Years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- , in default to further suffer Three Months Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 364 IPC To suffer Seven Years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer Three Months Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 379 IPC To suffer One Year Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer One Month Rigorous Imprisonment.

(4) Khema Ram, (5) Deepa Ram, (6) Sheopal, (7) Babu Lal s/o Deepa Ram, (8) Sagar Mal and (9) Laxman Prasad:

U/s. 302/149 IPC To suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to further suffer Six Months Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 148 IPC To suffer One Year Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer One Month Rigorous Imprisonment.

U/s. 201 IPC To suffer Five Years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- , in default to further suffer Three Months Rigorous Imprisonment.

All the sentences were directed to run concurrently., +

(2). It is the case of the prosecution that on November 2, 1996 around 6.30 PM while Ram Lal (now deceased) was coming back to his house from Reengus on a camel cart of Mana Ram, appellant Khemaram and his family members got Ram Lal down from the camel cart and took him to their house where he was beaten by them and thereafter he was taken to some unknown place. Rameshwar, the brother of Ramlal, on coming to know about the incident in the morning of November 3, 1996, lodged a written report with the Police Station Govindgarh where a case under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 364 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. On receiving the dead body of Ramlal Section 302 IPC was also added. After thorough investigation, the Investigation Officer submitted charge sheet. The investigation however was kept pending under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. against Bhagirath Mal. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, who discharged the co-accused Smt. Sarli and Moharli and framed charges under Sec. 120B/364, 148, 120B/149/302, 120B/201 and 394/397 against the appellants who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as may as 34 witnesses and got exhibited 75 documents. In their explanation under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., the appellants claimed innocence. No witness however in defence was examined. The learned trial Judge on hearing the final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.

(3). We have pondered over the rival submissions and scanned the material on record.

(4). The evidence adduced at the trial by the prosecution may be divided into seven sub-heads thus:-

(1) Evidence of criminal conspiracy;

(2) Evidence of abduction;

(3) Evidence of causing injurie















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top