IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Ratnaker Bhengra, Ambuj Nath, JJ.
Arvind Rajwar, son of Rambachan - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 930 of 2018, Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1113 of 2019
Decided On : 06-09-2024
JUDGMENT :
Heard the parties.
2. These criminal appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction dated 16.05.2018 and order of sentence dated 17.05.2018 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner VII-cum-FTC (CAW), Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 699 of 2016 and Sessions Trial No. 163 of 2017 (TR No. 08 of 2017), arising out of Namkum PS Case No. 170 of 2016 being GR Case No. 3657 of 2016 whereby and whereunder, the appellants were convicted under section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs.20,000/-each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, as per the fardbeyan dated 28.06.2016 of the informant PW-1 Pappu Yadav is that the informant is a driver of truck bearing no. BR-27E-2791 and wheat grain worth Rs.3-3.5 lacs was loaded in his truck. Informant further stated that when his truck was crossing Jam Chuan, another truck, on which N.N.T.C was written, overtook his truck and forcibly stopped his truck. Thereafter, altogether eight persons came down from the aforesaid truck and captured the informant and his cleaners Sonu Kumar (PW-2) and Gautam Kumar. Informant further stated that one of the miscreants took out something from paper and put it in water and forcibly made them to drink the mixture as a result of which they became semiconscious. Miscreants assaulted and injured them and took their truck towards Tata. Miscreants were aged about 30 to 32 years and were talking in Maghi language. Informant further stated that occurrence took place on 28.06.2014 at about 4 A.M in the morning.
4. On the basis of the fardbeyan FIR being Namkum P.S. Case no. 170/ 2016 dated 28.06.2016 was registered under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code against unknown persons. The Investigating Officer submitted first charge-sheet against the accused Arvind Rajwar and Ajay Kumar @ Gorelal and investigation was kept pending against other accused, thereafter, Supplementary charge-sheet was submitted against the accused Arun Kumar Singh. Cognizance of the offences were taken and case was committed to the court of sessions for trial. Charges were framed against the accused persons including the appellants under sections 395, 396 and 328 of IPC and trial was held. During pendency of trial accused Ajay @ Gorelal did not appear and his record was split up from the original record. At the conclusion of trial appellants were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.
5. Prosecution had examined altogether 10 witnesses out of whom PW-1 Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Kumar, is the driver and informant of the case; PW-2 Sonu kumar, is the cleaner of the truck; PW-3 is Ramakant Prasad and he is also driver; PW-4 is Nagendra Prasad and he the owner of the truck; PW-5 is Bashita Narayan Roy, who is the investigating officer; PW-6 Bhola Prasad Singh and PW-8 Ratibhan Singh, are police inspector; PW-7 is Dr. A.K. Choudhary; PW-9 Rajendra Kumar Dubey, is police inspector-cum-officer-in-charge of Namkum police station and PW-10 is Sourabh Kumar Gautam, who is judicial officer.
6. PW-1 Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Kumar is the informant of the case. Informant has stated in his evidence that occurrence is of 28.06.2016 at 4 a.m. in the morning. He proceeded from Buti More from his truck bearing registration no. BR-27E-2791 to Tata and wheat was loaded on the truck. As soon as he reached near Jam Chuan Tower (Mobile), another truck over took him and forcibly stopped his truck. Two persons came out from the aforesaid truck and gave him two fist blow and climbed on his truck. Total eight persons came out from that truck and they forcibly made to drink, Sonu Kumar and Gautam Kumar medicine. Six persons strangulated the informant with towel as a result informant became senseless. Miscreants took his truck and their truck to Tata, on which total wheat of value Rs.3.50 lacs were loaded in the truck. They were given medical treatment in the Maa Kal
AI
The court acquitted the appellants due to doubts in identification and failure to recover stolen property, emphasizing the prosecution's burden of proof.
The evidence of identification before the court is substantive, while the evidence of the identification parade is weak and only has corroborative value. The prosecution must prove that the accused w....
Proper identification procedures, such as Test Identification Parade, and the examination of key witnesses are essential to establish charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Identification parade compromised by prior exposure to witnesses renders conviction invalid.
In criminal trials, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; delays in Test Identification Parades do not automatically invalidate witness identifications if proper safeguards are ma....
When no TIP was conducted first version of complainant reflected in FIR would play an important role.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of legal proof beyond all shadow of doubt in a criminal trial and highlights that suspicion or claim of identification alone is not sufficient for conviction.
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.