Back
2010 Supreme(HP) 516
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL, JJ.
STATE OF H.P.
Appellant
VERSUS
ARJUN DEV AND ANOTHER
Respondents
Cr.Appeal No.392 of 1996
Decided on 19-3-2010.
For the Appellant:Mr.Vivek Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General. For the Respondent:Mr.Vinay Thakur, Advocate.
The judgment underscores the necessity of reliable evidence and fair investigation in criminal cases, especially in cases involving familial disputes and serious offenses like murder.
Headnote:
Murder - Criminal Law - IPC Sections 302, 120-B, 201 - The judgment discusses the evidence and circumstances surrounding the murder of Nisha Rani, the accused's sister. It highlights the discrepancies in the investigation, the unreliability of witness testimonies, and the lack of conclusive evidence linking the accused to the crime. The court dismisses the appeal and upholds the trial court's decision.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Nisha Rani, was murdered by strangulation. The accused, her brother, was acquitted of the charges under Sections 302, 120-B, and 201 of the IPC. The prosecution's case was based on the motive that the accused wanted to marry a specific person, and the deceased opposed this proposal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution was unreliable and lacked conclusive proof linking the accused to the murder. It highlighted discrepancies in witness testimonies, unfairness in the investigation, and doubts regarding the recovery of the alleged murder weapon.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the reliability of witness testimonies, the fairness of the investigation, and the sufficiency of evidence to establish the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of scrutinizing witness testimonies in cases involving familial disputes and highlighted the need for meticulous investigation in cases of serious offenses like murder. It also stressed the requirement for conclusive evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the trial court's decision to acquit the accused was upheld. The court found no error in the judgment of the trial court.
Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral)-This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 3.1.1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Una in Sessions Case No.22 of 1995, whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B and 201 IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are that deceased Nisha Rani was the sister of accused Arjun Dev and daughter of the second accused Baldev Singh. The undisputed facts are that on 8.1.1995 Nisha Rani was murdered by strangulation. It is also not disputed that her body was found sometime after 9 a.m. in the morning. The body was taken to the Hospital at Daulatpur Chowk. The Doctor at the Hospital informed PW-14 SI Kuldip Singh, the Investigating Officer, that a dead body of a young girl had been brought to the Hospital having marks of a rope on her neck. The Investigating Officer immediately went to the Hospital after recording the factum of his departure in the daily diary. In the Hospital, Baldev Singh made a statement which was recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C. This statement is Ext.PJ. In this statement Baldev Singh stated that Nisha Rani is one amongst his four daughters and he has two sons accused Arjun Dev and one Kushal Kumar. Baldev Singh in his statement given to the police stated that his son had some animosity with Balvinder, Hoshiar Singh etc. and suspected that they may have murdered his daughter. According to him his wife was admitted in the Hospital at Daulatpur Chowk since 30.12.1994. On 7th January, 1995 she was brought to spend a night at home and was to be taken back to the Hospital next morning. On 8.1.1995 he got up at 5 a.m. and he and his family members had tea. He asked Nisha Rani deceased and his son Arjun Dev to take their mother to the Hospital latest by the 9.30 a.m. bus. They also had to visit their elder daughter and therefore his wife asked him to arrange vegetables to be taken for her daughter. Nisha Rani then stated that she was going out and she would get the vegetables on her way. For a long time Nisha Rani did not return and then he sent his younger son Kushal Kumar to look for her. After a little while Kushal Kumar came running back and told Baldev that Nisha was lying near the sugarcane field. Then Baldev sent his elder son Arjun Dev who found Nisha unconscious and carried her back to the house. Then they arranged for a van and brought her to the hospital where the doctors pronounced her to be dead. On this basis FIR, Ext.PK, was registered.
3. According to the Investigating Officer, after recording the statement he got the photographs of the dead body taken and filled in the inquest reports Exts.PB and PC. He thereafter sent the dead body to the District Hospital, Una for post mortem. The Investigating Officer then went to the fields to verify the allegations made in the FIR. According to him, he did not find any marks of struggle in the field. The mustard leaves had been cut and it had rained the previous day. When he examined the dead body he did not find the clothes or the hair wet and there were no stains of mud on the legs or other parts of the body of the deceased and therefore he concluded that the occurrence did not take place in the field as alleged in the FIR. He prepared the site plan Ext.PL. According to him, the spot was pointed out to him by the accused Arjun Dev. He thereafter interrogated the persons named by Baldev Singh in his initial statement. He also interrogated some of the other villagers such as Sarla, Babita and Ashok and came to the conclusion that the allegations made in the FIR were incorrect.
4. According to the Investigating Officer, during the course of investigation he learnt that accused Arjun Dev had a fight with his sister Nisha the same morning since Arjun Dev wanted to marry Rekha and deceased Nisha was opposing this proposal. He therefore arrested the accused on 9.1.1995 on the basis of the material collected during investigation. According to the prosecution on 9.1.19
