Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL, RAJESH SEKHRI, JJ.
State of J&K – Petitioner
Versus
Ravinder Kumar – Respondent
CRAA No. 84 of 2013
Decided On : 28-09-2022
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - RANBIR PENAL CODE, SECTION 302; CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, SECTIONS 161, 164, 272 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 302 of the Ranbir Penal Code concerning murder, emphasizing the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It also referenced Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding witness statements and their admissibility. The court highlighted that the prosecution's failure to establish a credible case, particularly due to hostile witnesses and lack of corroborative evidence, influenced its decision to acquit the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the murder of Sonia by her husband, Ravinder Kumar, who allegedly attacked her with a screw driver after a quarrel. The prosecution presented evidence including witness statements and forensic reports, but many witnesses turned hostile, undermining the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, as the majority of witnesses either turned hostile or provided inconsistent testimonies. The sole witness's credibility was questioned due to lack of corroboration.
Issues: Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused under Section 302 RPC beyond a reasonable doubt, and whether the trial court properly assessed the evidence presented.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that a conviction can only be sustained on the testimony of a sole witness if that testimony is credible and corroborated. The absence of independent witnesses and the hostility of key witnesses led to reasonable doubt regarding the accused's guilt.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the trial court's acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH SEKHRI, J.
1. This Criminal Acquittal Appeal has been directed against judgment dated 31.12.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (trial court, for short), in case File No. 56/S titled State vs. Ravinder Kumar in Crime No. 57/2007 of Police Station Miran Sahib for the alleged commission of offence under section 302 of the Ranbir Penal Code 1989 ('RPC' for short).
2. The prosecution case is that on 08.11.2007, complainant-Shakti Kumar S/o Baldev Raj R/o Maralia, Tehsil R.S. Pura (Numberdar of the village), made a written complaint to SHO Police Station R. S. Pura alleging, inter alia, that accused Ravinder Kumar alias Babi S/o Bishan Dass R/o Maralia having strained relation with his wife Sonia used to quarrel with her and that day at about 8.15 PM when his wife Sonia was making a telephonic call on the STD shop of Rahul Sharma, accused Ravinder Kumar came to the shop, caught hold her of her hair, dragged her on the road and in furtherance of criminal intention to eliminate, brutally attacked her on throat and chin with an iron weapon, as a result she was seriously injured, profusely bled in front of the shop and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Accused after the commission of murder fled away. On the basis of this complaint, FIR came to be registered by Police Station Miran Sahib and investigation of the case was assigned to Sachinder Pal Singh SI. The investigating officer proceeded to the spot, prepared the spot sketch, seized blood stained clay, simple clay as also blood of the deceased for chemical analysis. Articles were sealed. Corpse of the deceased was shifted to the hospital for post mortem. Photographs of the dead body were also obtained. Later dead body of the deceased was handed over to the family for last rites against proper receipt. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. and got the aforesaid articles resealed from the Executive Magistrate and forwarded for chemical analysis to the FSL Jammu. He also obtained the report of Patwari with respect to place of occurrence and got the statements of material witnesses recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. before JMIC R.S. Pura. Further investigation of the case was conducted by Manjit Singh SHO Police Station Miran Sahib, who arrested the accused/respondent, prepared his disclosure statement and seized weapon of offence i.e. 'screw-driver' at the instance of the accused/respondent. Consequently, he also prepared spot sketch of the place of recovery and got statement of PW Rahula Sharma recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. in the court of JMIC R.S. Pura. He collected the postmortem report of the deceased, concluded the investigation and presented the final report in the court of JMIC R.S. Pura on 27.11.2008 and the same was committed to the court of Principal Sessions Judge, Jammu wherefrom it was transferred to learned trial court for disposal.
3. It surfaced during investigation that the accused/respondent was a Mason by profession and was residing at Delhi for the last seven years. He had illicit relationship with one Tripta Verma alias Sonia D/o Gian Chand R/o Pathankot and they were in live-in relationship, as a result they were blessed with two sons. It came to the light that accused/respondent suspected the character of deceased- Sonia and they used to quarrel with each other. Therefore, they shifted to Maralia where deceased-Sonia opened a Tailoring Shop to the disliking of the accused/respondent, as a result their relations further strained. The deceased had lodged a report with Women Cell against the accused/respondent where accused compromised the dispute on the condition that his wife, deceased-Sonia, would not go to tailoring shop. However, she refused to do so and continued with her tailoring occupation.
4. It further surfaced that on the fateful morning of 08.11.2007, the couple quarreled with each other as deceased-Sonia was adamant to run the tailoring shop. When the ac
The principle that mere absconding does not imply guilt unless supported by corroborative evidence was emphasized, reinforcing the standard of proof required in criminal cases.
The evidence from hostile witnesses can be accepted if it supports the prosecution's case; the prosecution proved the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based on witness testimonies and materi....
The judgment emphasizes the fundamental legal principle of proof beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, highlighting the prosecution's burden to establish the accused's guilt based on credible an....
The court established that direct eyewitness testimony is paramount in murder cases, and self-defense claims must be substantiated by credible evidence.
The need for conclusive evidence and a complete chain of evidence to establish guilt, and the limited jurisdiction of the appellate court in interfering with findings of fact by the trial court.
Conviction for voluntarily causing simple hurt upheld; partial witness contradictions and defective investigation do not warrant acquittal; separate incidents permit differential conviction of accuse....
The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, caution against relying solely on the testimony of a hostile witness, and the absence of conclusive evidence poi....
Circumstantial evidence must establish a clear chain of guilt; absence of crucial witness testimony undermines prosecution's case.
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
