Back
2019 Supreme(HP) 631
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Anoop Chitkara, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh - Appellant
Vs.
Sunil Kumar @ Sonu And Another - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2011
Decided On : 15-11-2019
Vinod Thakur, Adv., Bhupinder Thakur, Adv., Svaneel Jaswal, Adv., Narender Thakur, Adv., Ashok Kumar Thakur, Adv., Nimish Gupta, Adv., K.S. Banyal, Adv., Inder Rana, Adv.
Burden of proof lies with prosecution; acquittal affirmed due to insufficient evidence linking accused to murder, emphasizing that mere suspicion cannot support conviction.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 201, 279, and 304-A - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 187 - Appeal against acquittal - Accused acquitted due to insufficient evidence to prove culpable homicide and connection to the deceased's death - Prosecution's post mortem and witness statements failed to establish a criminal act - Court emphasized the burden of proof lies with prosecution and any doubts must favor the accused. (Paras 25, 100)
(B) Criminal Law - Burden of proof - It rests on the prosecution to prove the guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and mere suspicion or conjecture is insufficient for conviction. (Paras 64, 98)
Facts of the case:
The State challenged the acquittal of two accused in a murder case concerning the death of Rajeev Sharma, with allegations of culpable homicide and evidence destruction stemming from an accident. Initial post mortem suggested accidental death, and witness statements were deemed unreliable and improbable.
Findings of Court:
The court found the acquittal justified, citing the lack of evidence to substantiate the prosecution's claims.
Issues: The court examined the sufficiency of post mortem conclusions and the reliability of eyewitness accounts under duress and public agitation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled the prosecution's failure to conclusively establish guilt and emphasized the standard that requires the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Result: Criminal appeal dismissed; acquittal upheld.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. details of investigations and eyewitness accounts (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. disclosure statements and evidence retrieved (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. prosecution's case presented at trial (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. trial court's acquittal of the accused (Para 24 , 25) |
| 6. expert testimonies and post-mortem findings (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 7. court’s analysis on credibility of evidence (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 8. issues with the eyewitness testimony (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 9. evaluation of disclosure statements (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50) |
| 10. insufficient evidence to support claims (Para 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 11. details surrounding the crime scene (Para 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 12. final arguments regarding last-seen evidence (Para 57 , 58 , 59) |
| 13. admissions made during cross-examination (Para 60 , 61 , 62) |
| 14. legal principles regarding burden of proof (Para 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67) |
| 15. importance of credible cross-examination (Para 68 , 69 , 70) |
| 16. impact of suggestions made during trial (Para 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75) |
| 17. legal framework governing reverse burden (Para 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80) |
| 18. clarification on evidential value of admissions (Para 81 , 82 , 83 , 84) |
| 19. court's final determination and reasoning (Para 85 , 86) |
| 20. conclusion of the appeal (Para 100 , 101) |
JUDGMENT :
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Challenging the acquittal of the respondents-accused, for culpable homicide amounting to murder, and destruction of evidence, the State has come up before this Court by way of the present criminal appeal.
2. The gist of the facts, apposite to arrive at a just conclusion, traces its origin to the General Diary No. 6(A), dated 19.5.2009 (Ext.PW-22/A), recorded at 6.25 a.m., in Police Station, Dehra, District Kangra, HP, wherein the President of Gram Panchayat Nehran Pukhar made a telephone call to Police Station Dehra, informing that one person is lying on the roadside at Nehran Pukhar. On receipt of this information, ASI Mukesh Kumar (PW-27), along with the other Police officials, reached the spot.
3. On reaching the spot, ASI Mukesh Kumar recorded the statement of Pradeep Sharma (PW-1) under Section 154 CrPC (Ext.PW-1/A). Pradeep informed the Police that on May 19, 2009, in the morning at around 6 a.m., his Mausi (mother's sister) Smt. Santosh, made a phone call to him, and informed him that Rajeev Sharma @ Vicky is lying on the roadside at Nehran Pukhar. Smt. Santosh told Pradeep to visit the spot. On reaching the place, Pradeep Sharma found Rajeev @ Vicky lying dead on the side of the road. He also noticed injuries on his head and chest and saw that a lot of blood had oozed out from such injuries. On seeing the spot, Pradeep inferred that during the intervening night of May 18, and May 19, 2009, Rajeev met with an accident with some vehicle, in a hit and run case.
4. On receipt of this information, FIR No. 60, dated 19.5.2009 (Ext. PW-18/A), under Sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was registered in the file of Police Station Dehra, District Kangra, HP.
5. The Investigating Officer filled up the inquest form (Ext. PW-3/B) and inspected the scene of crime. From the spot, Police found one plastic flap (of some vehicle), and seized the same. The Police also sent the dead body, along with the requisite letter, to RPGMC Tanda, for conducting post mortem examination. In this letter sent to Doctors, the investigating officer mentioned the probable cause of death as a result of accidental injuries.
6. In RPGMC Tanda, Dr. Anita Mahajan (PW-3), under the guidance of Dr. D.P. Swami (PW-11), conducted the post mortem examination on the body of Rajeev Sharma @ Vicky (deceased), and gave post mortem report (Ext. PW-3/C). During post mortem examination, the Medical Experts noticed a fracture on the skull, and congestion in larynx and trachea, which were full of blood. The experts also noticed sme
