The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the crime, and the absence of motive weighs in favor of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Shah, J.

1. The present appeal under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the State of Rajasthan being aggrieved against the order dated 17.11.1997 passed by Sh. Ramchandra Jatav, learned Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions Case No.7/97, whereby learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent- Naina Ram for offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

Facts of the case:

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 23.11.1996 at around 08:40 AM, a telephonic information was received at Police Station, Jalore from Medical Officer-in-charge of Government Hospital, Jalore that one person has been found in an injured condition. This information was recorded in the roznamcha at serial number 997 (Ex.P./20-A) and Amar Singh, ASI was sent to the Government Hospital. The injured was examined and the injury report (Ex.P/10) was prepared. Amar Singh, ASI (PW-2) made an inquiry report with the Medical Officer as to whether the injured is in fit position to give statement or not. The Medical Officer informed that the injured was not in a position to give the statement. Thereupon, Mr. Amar Singh recorded statement of brother and wife of the injured, namely Narpatram (PW-9) and Smt. Kamla respectively. Thereafter, Mr. Amar Singh, ASI reached the place of occurance and inspecting the site and prepared site map (Ex.P/5) and site inspection report (Ex.P/5A) in presence of all the witnesses. Mr. Amar Singh, ASI collected and seized sand (smeared with blood) and regular/normal sand. Subsequently, the injured was referred to Jodhpur for further treatment. In the meanwhile, the investigation was carried out by Mr. Amar Singh, ASI and he submiited the investigation report (Ex. P/15) before the Station House Officer, Police Station Jalore. Based upon which, the FIR No.304/1996 was lodged at Police Station, Jalore for the offences punishable under Section 323, 325 and 307 of IPC. On 27.10.1996 the report referred to the statement of one Sh. Rustam, who informed the fact of the deceased- Kishore being taken in a taxi driven by Saleem and accompanied by accused-respondent- Naina Ram and one sh. Deepa Ram Meghwal. In the meanwhile, on 27.10.1996 at around 10:15 AM, the injured- Kishore passed away at Jodhpur Hospital and, thereafter, the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC was added. The information of death of deceased- Kishore was given by Sh. Jasraj (PW-7) who was the brother of the deceased.

3. During the course of investigation, various witnesses were examined and post framing of charge, the trial Court proceeded with the trial and the prosecution examined 17 witnesses as also got exhibited various documents to prove their case. The accused respondent examined himself as DW-1 in defence. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he denied the commission of offences and stated that he was falsely implicated. The learned trial Court post considering the entire record vide its judgment dated 17.11.1997 acquitted the respondent- Naina Ram for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC while specifically holding that it was a case of circumstantial evidence and the entire chain was not complete and there were various missing links in the story of the prosecution.

Argument on behalf of the appellant- State:

4. Laying a challenge to the above mentioned judgment, the learned Public Prosecutor has argued that though it is a case of circumstantial evidence but the prosecution has been able to show that the complete chain was found intact and there was no missing links whatsoever. It has also been asserted that PWs. 3 & 5 are the witnesses who support the stand of the accused respondent being last seen with the deceased- Kishore.

5. Furthermore, PW-15 Hariram is an important witness before whom the accused-respondent has given an extra-judicial confession of the entire incident and the testimony of all the three witnesses has remained un-controverted and there were no inconsistencies whatsoever in their testimony. I