Back
2025 Supreme(Raj) 1927
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, SUNIL BENIWAL, JJ.
State of Rajasthan - Appellant
Versus
Irfan Khan S/o Raheem Baksh – Respondent
D.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 322 of 2024
Decided on : 11-07-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. C.S. Ojha, P.P.
For the Respondent: Mr. Hari Shankar Shrimali assisted by Mr. Ritish Bhatnagar
Acquittals in criminal cases require strong evidence and a clear chain of circumstantial proof; mere suspicion or speculation is insufficient for conviction.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378(3) - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(2)(V), 3(2)(vi) - Appeal against acquittal - The Trial Court acquitted the accused on grounds of insufficient evidence, extending the benefit of doubt - The prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence required to convict - Key evidence, including the identity of the deceased and motive, was not sufficiently proven. (Paras 1, 3, 7, 10, 12, 20)
(B) Acquittal standards - Appeals against acquittal are subject to stringent scrutiny, requiring demonstration of illegality or perversity in the lower court's judgment. (Paras 6, 18)
(C) Burden of proof - The principle that the prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt remains paramount. (Para 17)
Facts of the case:
The incident involved a male body found decapitated in 2015, leading to the charges against the accused. The Trial Court acquitted the accused, citing lack of evidence.
Findings of Court:
The higher court found no grounds for interference with the Trial Court's decision.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the adequacy of the prosecution's evidence, identity of the deceased, and the strength of circumstantial evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court articulated that circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain leading to guilt; mere speculation or weak links lack sufficient basis for conviction. Final decision: The application seeking leave to appeal was dismissed.
Judgment :
1. In the instant criminal leave to appeal under Section 378 (III) & (I) Cr.P.C. preferred by the appellant-State, a challenge is laid to the judgment of acquittal dated 16.05.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases & Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bikaner (in short, ‘Trial Court’), in Sessions Case No.55/2015 (CIS No.239/2015) - State of Rajasthan Vs. Irfan Khan & Ors., whereby the accused respondents, namely, Irfan Khan and Kapil @ Gopi were acquitted of the charges against them under Sections 302 , 201, 120B IPC & Sections 3(2)(V), 3(2)(vi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; and accused- respondent Smt. Arti has been acquitted of the charges against her under Sections 302 , 201 & 120B IPC.
1.1. The matter pertains to an incident which had occurred in the year 2015 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 2024.
2. Brief facts of the present case, as placed before this Court by Mr. C.S. Ojha, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the appellant-State, are that on 08.05.2015 at around 05:30 PM, FIR No. 114/2015 was registered at Jai Narayan Vyas Colony Police Station under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. The FIR was lodged after a male dead body, aged about 25–30 years, was found in a naked state with a decapitated neck in the Sudarshan Nagar drain, behind Nagnechi Temple.
2.1. On inspection, bloodstains were found on the nearby bridge, suggesting the body was thrown into the drain from there. The body was found stuck to a stone about 100 feet from the bridge. The FSL team was called to the spot, and the unidentified body was sent to PBM Hospital mortuary. Initial investigation indicated that unknown person(s) had murdered the deceased by beheading and disposed of the body to destroy evidence and conceal identity.
2.2. After investigation, the charge-sheet was presented against the accused-respondents Irfan Khan and Kapil under Sections 302 , 201 and 120-B IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Caste and The Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and against accused-respondent Aarti under Section 302 , 201 and 120-B IPC, the same were read over to the accused-respondents, who denied the same and claimed trial, and the trial commenced accordingly.
2.3. During the course of trial, the statements of 16 witnesses (P.W. 1 to P.W. 16) were recorded, and documents (Ex.P. 1 to 62) got exhibited on behalf of the prosecution, and in defence, documents (Ex.D. 1-2) were exhibited; Articles (Article 1 to 22) were also presented before the Court. The accused-respondents were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which they pleaded innocence and false implication in the criminal case in question.
2.4. After conclusion of the trial, the learned Trial Court, while finding that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts, acquitted the accused-respondents Irfan Khan and Kapil of the charges against them under Sections 302 , 201, 120-B IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(vi) of the Scheduled Caste and The Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and accused-respondent Aarti of the charges under Sections 302 , 201 and 120-B IPC, vide the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 16.05.2023, while extending them the benefit of doubt; against which, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-State.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the appellant-State submits that the learned Trial Court has erred in law and on facts in acquitting the accused-respondents vide the impugned judgment dated 16.05.2023. It is submitted that the prosecution had led sufficient and credible evidence to establish the identity of the deceased, the motive behind the offence, the last-seen circumstance, and the recovery of material evidence connecting the accused-respondents to the crime.
3.1. It is submitted that the deceased was identified by his brother, Shravan (P.W.15), based on a distinct
