Back
2013 Supreme(HP) 913
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Sanjay Karol, Rajiv Sharma, JJ.
Tek Chand - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 444 of 2008
Decided On : 29-11-2013
For the Appellant :K.B. Khajuria, Advocate.
For the Respondent:D.C. Pathik and Ramesh Thakur, Advocates.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure - Conviction Appeal - Section 302 IPC - [ANIMOSITY, CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, PRESUMPTION] - [Section 302 IPC, Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872] - The court discussed the chain of circumstances, presumption, and circumstantial evidence in the case. It highlighted the need for conclusive evidence to connect the accused with the crime and emphasized the caution required in evaluating circumstantial evidence. The court found that the conviction was based on mere suspicion and presumption, resulting in a miscarriage of justice, and acquitted the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Tek Chand, was convicted for the murder of Tej Lal based on circumstantial evidence and presumption. The prosecution alleged animosity between the appellant and the deceased and presented circumstantial evidence to establish guilt. The trial court convicted the appellant, but the appellant appealed the decision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court misdirected itself in appreciating the evidence, relied on mere suspicion and presumption, and failed to establish conclusive evidence connecting the accused with the crime. The court concluded that the conviction resulted in a miscarriage of justice and acquitted the accused.
Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, the application of presumption, and the correctness of the trial court's judgment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for conclusive evidence to establish guilt based on circumstantial evidence, cautioned against relying solely on suspicion and presumption, and highlighted the importance of a cautious approach in evaluating circumstantial evidence.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the accused was acquitted of the charged offence. The court directed the refund of the fine amount and the immediate release of the accused.
Sanjay Karol, J. - In this appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, convict Tek Chand has assailed the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 26.06.2008, passed by learned Sessions Judge Chamba, Division Chamba, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 61 of 2007. The appellant stands convicted for having committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
It is the case of prosecution that convict Tek Chand son of Bishani was having animosity with deceased Tej Lal son of Chetu, a resident of Village Guwari. Deceased had two brothers, namely, Puran, who was also residing in the same Village and complainant Dev Raj (PW.1), who was residing in Village Satloga. On 01.04.2007, Tej Lal had gone to Tarela Mandir with Hari Lal (not examined). Thereafter, Tek Chand accused, Tej Lal deceased and Tek Singh (not examined) went to the house of Sh. Sahab Singh (PW.3) in Village Satloga, where they consumed liquor. After sometime, Tek Chand and Tej Lal proceeded for their Village and Tek Singh went to his house. In the morning of 02.04.2007, body of Tej Lal was found lying in the fields of Hari Lal (not examined). Police was informed and Inspector Hem Singh Saklani (PW.10) arrived at the spot where statements (Ex.PA) of Dev Raj (PW.1), Fattu Ram (PW.2) and Puran Chand (not examined) were recorded. FIR No. 31 of 2007 (Ex.PW.7/A), dated 04.04.2007 was registered by Head Constable Arvind Kumar at Police Station Tissa, District Chamba, under the provisions of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Inquest report dated 02.04.2007 (Ex.PW.10/A) was prepared. The dead body was sent for postmortem, which was conducted by Doctor Dipesh (PW.4) on 02.04.2007, who issued MLC (Ex.PW.4/D), based on the report (Ex.PW.4/C) of the Chemical Analyst. The deceased had died due to strangulation. The police visited the spot again on 04.04.2007, prepared site plan (Ex.PW.10/B), where statements of other witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC. On the basis of suspicion, accused who was arrested on 05.04.2007, made a disclosure statement (Ex.PW.2/C) in the presence of Fattu Ram (PW.2), on the basis of which his blood stained clothes were recovered. Investigation revealed that it was the accused who had murdered the deceased. With the completion of investigation, challan was presented in the Court for trial.
2. Accused was charged for having committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to establish its case, prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses and statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded, in which he took up a defence of innocence and false implication. No evidence was led in defence.
4. As already observed, trial Court has convicted the accused of the charged offence and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment and pay fine. Hence the present appeal.
5. The trial Court convicted the accused, finding that the chain in circumstances, leading to the conclusion of his guilt was complete. To this effect, the Court culled out the following circumstances:-
"(i) That the accused and the deceased who were well known to each other have consumed liquor together on 1.4.2007 at about 5 PM in the house of PW.3 in the company of one Tek Singh;
(ii) At that time, accused threatened the deceased by saying that he would be so beaten that he would remember the beatings;
(iii) Both accused and deceased left the house of PW.3 Sahab Singh at 9 PM;
(iv) Deceased was lastly seen alive in the company of the accused at about 9 PM on 1.4.2007;
(v) Accused returned to the house of PW.3 at 4 AM on 2.4.2007 and slept there and left his house in the morning;
(vi) On 2.4.2007 at about 7.30 AM, dead body of deceased Tej Lal was found lying in the fields of Hari Singh;
(vii) Deceased died due to th
