IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, VIRENDER SINGH, JJ.
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
GHANDHI RAM S/O SALO RAM – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 382 of 2010
Decided On : 04-11-2022
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 378, 154, 313, 161 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27 - Murder Offence - Daughter of complainant was also residing with her maternal grandmother - as Usual, she had gone she immediately returned back and disclosed to her mother that someone had killed her maternal grandmother during night time. Para 45.
Finding of the Court :
As statement of PW-9 is concerned, his statement is too short to raise any finger of suspicion against accused, as this witness has simply stated that when they were taking rest, while returning back from house of Raju, then, they noticed accused Ghandhi Ram proceeding towards house of an old lady (deceased) - However, this witness, in his examination-in-chief, could not disclose about month and simply stated that it was 22nd of 2009 - From this, no inference can be drawn that on day of incident, accused was found allegedly going towards house of deceased - PW-10 is resident of Village - He could not tell about month and year of alleged incident - From his entire statement, no inference can be drawn that deceased and accused were last seen together - As such, said theory is also not liable even to consider, what to talk to base the conviction on the basis of said fact - No doubt, a brutal murder has taken place, but this does not mean that without any clinching and clear evidence, person, who has been named as accused, in case, should be convicted - From any stretch of imagination, findings, so recorded by learned trial Court, do not fall within definition of “perverse”- Moreover, with judgment of acquittal in favour of accused, presumption of innocence, which was available to accused, at time of inception of trial, becomes double - In view of above, there is no occasion for this Court to differ with findings recorded by learned trial Court, while acquitting accused.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
1. The State has preferred the present appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as to as the ‘Cr.P.C.’) against the judgment dated 17.05.2010, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial Court’) in Sessions Trial No. 34 of 2009.
2. By way of the judgment dated 17.05.2010, the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the ‘accused’) from the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’).
3. Brief facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, before this Court, may be summed up, as under.
4. That on 23.04.2009, Sh. Uttam Chand alongwith Sh. Balam Ram and Sh. Subhash Kumar, reported the matter to the police at Police Post Chouhra that Smt. Koula Devi, Wd/o Sh. Madho Ram, who was residing in her Adhwar (seasonal abode), had been found, in a naked condition and she might have died.
5. In order to verify the above facts, ASI Manohar Lal, In-charge, Police Post Chouhra, alongwith police officials had reached at the spot, where, Sh. Sunko Ram (complainant), got recorded his statement under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. in which, he has disclosed that he is resident of Village Kanda and labourer by profession. He was married to Ms. Saroj, D/o Smt. Koula Devi, about 25 years ago. His father-in-law had died and thereafter, his mother-in-law had started residing in Adhwar (seasonal abode), pursuing her agriculture pursuits and also looking after the livestock. The daughter of the complainant, namely, Shamo Devi, was also residing with her maternal grandmother and she used to return back daily in the evening, as there was no electricity connection in the said Adhwar.
6. On 23.04.2009, at about 6:30 a.m. as usual, she had gone to Adhwar, she immediately returned back and disclosed to her mother that someone had killed her maternal grandmother during the night time, upon which, Sh. Vijay Singh, has informed the complainant about the incident and he reached at the place of incident at about 9:00 a.m. When, he reached there, he found his mother-in-law lying dead and having the marks of injuries on her face. One blood stained danda was also found lying there.
7. According to the complainant, some unknown person had killed his mother-in-law in the intervening night of 22/23.04.2009.
8. On the basis of the above facts, police registered the case under Section 302 of the IPC and criminal machinery swung into motion.
9. After completing the formalities of inquest report, the dead body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination to CHC Dalhousie and spot map was prepared. The danda, lying at the spot, was taken into possession and the blood stained portion of the danda was peeled off and was also taken into possession. The blood stained soil was taken into possession alongwith the control soil sample. After the post mortem, dead body of the deceased was handed over to her relatives for last rites. The viscera, alongwith the peeled off portion of the danda, control soil sample and blood stained soil were sent to FSL Junga, for chemical analysis.
10. In the chemical examination, the human blood was found in the blood stained soil as well as the peeled off portion of the danda and the blood group of the same was found to be B+ve. Statements of the witnesses were recorded.
11. On the basis of the suspicion, accused Ghandhi Ram was associated in the investigation of the case and on 25.05.2009, he was arrested. During his interrogation, accused has confessed that he had killed Smt. Koula Devi with the danda, as she used to object him for grazing the livestock near her Adhwar. On the basis of the statement of the accused, the ornaments of Smt. Koula Devi were got recovered from the shop of one goldsmith at Chamba, which were identified by the daughter of the deceased. The empty purse, which, accord
Govinda Reddy vs. State of Mysore
Hanumant Govind Nargundkar vs. State of M.P. AIR 1952 SC 343 : 1953 Cri. L.J. 129
Mohan Lal Pangasa vs. State of U.P. (1974) 4 SCC 607: 1974 SCC (Cri) 643: AIR 1974 SC 1144
Munikrishna @ Krishna vs. State by Ulsoor P.S. 2022 (0) Supreme(SC) 1097
Raghav Prapanna Tripathi vs. State of U.P. AIR 1963 SC 74 : (1963) 1 CrLJ 70
Murder Charge - When a murder charge is to be proved solely on circumstantial evidence, as in this case, presumption of innocence of the accused must have a dominant role.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence for conviction; failure to prove the last seen theory and inconsistencies in witness testimonies led to the acquittal.
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt if it forms a complete chain pointing to the accused, even without direct evidence.
Circumstantial evidence requires complete chain excluding innocence; long time gap invalidates last seen theory without ruling out third-party intervention; open-place recoveries lack credibility; un....
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances and a motive for the crime to secure a conviction.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and conclusive chain of evidence that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence; mere suspicion is ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.