Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Pankaj Mithal, C.J. and Rajnesh Oswal, J.
State of J&K – Appellant
Versus
Suram Chand and Others – Respondent
CRAA No.52/2011
Decided on : 29-8-2022
acquittal - Criminal Law - Sections 302, 342, 34 RPC - The judgment discusses the prosecution's evidence, including witness statements, medical opinions, and recovery of the weapon of offence, to establish the guilt of the respondents. However, the court found the evidence lacking credibility and reliability, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that the respondents assaulted and confined the deceased, resulting in his death. The prosecution presented witness statements, medical opinions, and evidence of the recovery of the weapon of offence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the witness statements lacking credibility and reliability, and the recovery of the weapon of offence was not proven by the prosecution. The trial court's decision to acquit the respondents was upheld, as the evidence did not support a conviction.
Issues: Credibility of witness statements, reliability of evidence, and sufficiency of proof for conviction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that in an appeal against acquittal, interference is warranted only when there is perversity in the judgment. The trial court's decision must be both possible and plausible in view of the evidence presented by the parties.
Final Decision: The appeal was found to be devoid of merits and was dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Rajnesh Oswal, J.-
This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 30.10.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Reasi (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court) in file No. 46/Session, titled, “State vs. Suran Chand and others” for commission of offences under Sections 302, 342 and 34 RPC in FIR No. 43/2008 of Police Station, Mahore, by virtue of which the respondents have been acquitted of the charges for commission of the aforesaid offences.
2. The appeal has been filed only on the ground that the learned trial court has not appreciated the evidence led by the prosecution in its right perspective and acquitted the respondents, particularly when the prosecution had successfully proved the case against the respondents.
3. Mr. R. S. Jamwal, learned AAG vehemently argued that there was abundant evidence on record that warranted the conviction of the respondents but the learned trial court has wrongly acquitted the respondents.
4. Heard and perused the record.
5. The prosecution story as it emerges from the charge sheet is that on 17.05.2008, a written complaint was filed before the Police Post, Arnas by Sher Singh S/o Balwant Singh stating therein that on 16.05.2008, his real sister, namely, Suglan W/o Sher Singh resident of Lower Judda, came to his house at 10/11 A.M and told him that her brother Sansar Chand, who was working as a labourer at Katra had come to her house in the evening and had dinner over there. After having meals, when they were about to sleep, her elder brother-in-law Suram Chand called Sansar Chand to his house and started demanding Rs. 5,000/- from him. On refusal by her brother to pay the money, due to past enmity, Suram Chand along with his brothers, Prem Singh and Bhalmesh Singh assaulted her brother with lathies. When he raised the alarm, Suram Chand tied her brother’s hands and legs with a rope. After hearing noise, she and her husband reached on spot and stopped them from acting in such a manner but they did not pay any heed. Suram Chand was about to kill her brother. On hearing this, he along with his sister went to the house of Suram Chand and saw that his brother had been confined and tied by Suram Chand in his house, whose neck and arm were broken and was struggling for his life. The accused, in order to extract money from his brother, severely assaulted him thereby attempting to kill him.
6. On receipt of the application, entry vide report No. 11 dated 17.05.2008 was made in Daily Diary and the copy of the same was sent to Police Station for registration of the case and as such, the FIR bearing No. 43/2008 under Sections 307, 342, 323 and 34 RPC was registered against the respondents.The investigation was handed over to Sunil Kumar-Sub Inspector. He came on spot, prepared the site plan and shifted the injured to the hospital in an unconscious condition. Sansar Chand was referred to SDH, Reasi but he succumbed to his injuries on 17.05.2008 and the offence under section 302 RPC was added. The post-mortem of the deceased was conducted and the seizure of the blood stained wearing apparels of the deceased was made and dead body was handed over to the legal heirs of the deceased for performance of last rites. Investigating Officer also seized the blood stained and unstained clay, recorded the statements of prosecution witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. and those of the material witnesses under section 164-A Cr.P.C and arrested the accused/respondents. The Investigating Officer also made the recovery of the weapons of offence i.e. lathi and rope on the basis of disclosure made by the respondent-Suram Chand.
7. During investigation, it was found that the deceased Sansar Chand was working as a labourer at Katra and on 15.05.2008 when he returned from Katra and was going to his house, he stayed in his sister’s house i.e. Suglan Devi. He had dinner in the house of his sister and when they were about to sleep, the elder brother-in-law of the sister of the complainant, who is residing adjacent to the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
