The importance of corroborated evidence, the necessity to establish motive, and the duty of the investigating officer to conduct a thorough and responsible investigation.

1. This criminal appeal aims at and seeks setting aside of the judgment dated 18th September, 2008, hereinafter for short impugned judgment, by virtue of which respondent has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him in case titled State v. Mohammad Ramzan Dar alias Ghada, bearing FIR No. 52/2000 of police station Rainawari, for the commission of offences punishable under Section 302, of the Ranbir Penal Code, for short RPC.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appeal merits to be dismissed because of the following.

BRIEF FACTS

3. A Report was received by the Police Station Rainawari, hereinafter P/S, on 28th April, 2000, that dead body of one Mohammad Amin Rather, was recovered and cause of the death was strangulation. Dead body was sent for postmortem and after conducting postmortem doctor opined the cause of death as strangulation. Accordingly First Information Report, for short FIR, was registered and investigation was conducted.

4. The FIR, in the instant case, has been read, for the purposes of investigation, together with a missing report filed a day earlier by one Mst. Irshada, wife of Mohammad Amin Rather.

5. During investigation accused was arrested and case was presented before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, who committed the same to the court of Sessions Judge, Srinagar, being a case of Sessions trial. Learned Sessions Judge, in turn transferred it to the trial court viz. court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Srinagar. Charge was framed against the accused, who pleaded not guilty and instead sought trial.

6. Prosecution, in support of its case, produced and examined seventeen out of nineteen witnesses listed in the witness calendar. The non-examination of the two witnesses has gone unexplained despite the fact that both of them have been shown to be the witnesses of occurrence. Thus adverse inference had to be, and rightly, drawn against the prosecution.

7. Statement of the accused was recorded in terms of Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for short, Cr.P.C, on 7th October, 2006, and the accused was asked to enter upon the defence.

8. Accused examined Mst. Rehti and Mehraj-ud-din as defence witnesses.

9. The basis of the prosecution case, as per the police final report, and the evidence recorded, was that deceased was last seen with the accused. The trial court has rightly held that it has remained uncorroborated that deceased had taken liquor or charas which had affected all of his organs. It is also rightly pointed out that the plea that deceased was last seen with the accused has not been proved by the prosecution. Thus the root of the prosecution story has gone unnourished making its fall inevitable.

10. As per the testimony of Investigating Officer, the deceased was on a bicycle and because of having consumed wine, and Charas, he could not control himself, therefore, the bicycle was taken back by PW 5.

11. PW Mohammad Shafi has deposed that deceased was in full senses; neither PW 5 nor deceased had consumed liquor or any other narcotic substance. He and deceased reached near the residence of deceased between 8.30 to 8.45 PM.

12. There is no evidence brought on record by the prosecution that deceased had visited the residence of accused in the intervening night of 27/28 April, 2000. The investigating officer has deposed that according to his information the deceased had intended to go to the residence of accused. While as, according to PW No. 5, the deceased intended to return the bicycle to the accused and there is no evidence on the file to opine that deceased had gone to the accused during the fateful night.

13. PW No. 1, Arshida has deposed that she had seen her husband, deceased, going to the residence of accused at the relevant point of time and did not return to his own residence. But she is not a witness to that effect as per the calendar of witnesses. PW No. 5 has deposed that missing report was lodged with the police and efforts were made to trace him b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document