2018 Supreme(P&H) 4086
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
A.B.Chaudhari, Inderjit Singh, JJ.
Sahi Ram - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
Crl. Appeal No.D-544-DB of 2003 (O&M)
Decided On : 27-02-2018
Rivayat Hayer, Advocate, for the Appellant; Kuldeep Tiwari, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, for the Respondent-State; P.R. Yadav, Advocate, for the Complainant
In cases of circumstantial evidence, a complete chain of circumstances and a strong motive are essential to establish guilt. Reasonable doubt should be resolved in favor of the accused.
Headnote:
Circumstantial Evidence - Murder - Section 302 IPC - The court discussed the chain of circumstances, motive, and the recovery of evidence to determine the guilt of the accused. The judgment highlighted the importance of a complete chain of circumstances and the need for a strong motive in cases of circumstantial evidence. It also emphasized the significance of reasonable doubt and the benefit of doubt in favor of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of the complainant's husband. The prosecution presented circumstantial evidence, including witness testimonies and medical evidence, to support their case. The appellant denied the charges and claimed innocence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the chain of circumstances was not complete and did not conclusively point towards the guilt of the accused. It noted the absence of a strong motive for the accused to commit the murder and raised doubts about the recovery of evidence. Consequently, the court gave the benefit of doubt to the accused and acquitted him of the charges.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, the presence of a strong motive, and the credibility of the recovered evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The judgment emphasized the importance of a complete chain of circumstances and a strong motive in cases of circumstantial evidence. It also highlighted the significance of reasonable doubt and the benefit of doubt in favor of the accused.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, and acquitted the accused.
JUDGMENT
Inderjit Singh, J. - The present appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the judgment of conviction dated 09.05.2003 and order of sentence dated 13.05.2003 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Narnaul, whereby he was convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of ' 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month under Section 302 IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 21.05.2002, complainant Santra got recorded her statement to SI Kurda Ram. It was stated by the complainant in her statement that her husband Bhola Ram owns three killa of land within the revenue estate of Mohindergarh Salimabad. Vegetables have been sown in half killa of that land. To keep watch, her husband used to sleep during night in the field in which vegetables have been sown. One day earlier, i.e. on 20.05.2002, at about 8.00 p.m., she along with her son Arvind aged about 17/18 years, had gone to the field for delivering food to her husband. At that time, Sahi Ram, whose field and residential house are adjacent to their field, had been sitting in the field with her husband and was consuming liquor. After giving food, she returned to her house. On that day i.e. 21.05.2002, at about 5.00-5.15 a.m., she and her son Arvind reached the field for plucking vegetables and saw that her husband having injuries and smeared with blood, was lying on the barbed wire fenced around the field. Complainant and her son lifted him from there and laid down on the cot and found him dead. He was having many injuries on his chest, mouth and blood was also there. Besides, hawai chappals (flip-flops) of her husband, hawai chappals of Sahi Ram, out of which, one is broken and a plastic bottle of liquor containing little quantity of liquor left in the same and blood stained shirt of her husband, in torn condition were also lying near that place. The mosquito net along with its bamboo sticks, which was used by her husband during the night before sleep was missing from the spot. Complainant further stated that about one year ago, Sahi Ram had given beatings to her brother-in-law (devar) Yashwant in a quarrel, regarding which, her husband reprimanded Sahi Ram. On account of this grudge, Sahi Ram committed murder of her husband by causing injuries after administering him liquor in the night. On the basis of this statement, ruqa was sent, upon which, FIR was registered. Inquest proceedings were conducted. Rough site plan was prepared. Dead body was sent for postmortem examination. Accused was arrested and as per his disclosure statement, four bamboo sticks, mosquito net and Kassiya were recovered, which were taken into police possession. After necessary investigation, challan was presented against the accused-appellant.
3. On presentation of challan, copies of challan and other documents were supplied to the accused-appellant under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Finding prima facie case, the appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 302 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 Surender, who proved the photographs ExP1 to Ex.P6 and negatives thereof Ex.P7 to Ex.P12. PW-2 Rajpal proved the scaled site plan Ex.PA. PW-3 Constable Mahesh deposed that after post-mortem examination on the dead body on 21.05.2002, he received sealed parcel from the doctor, which he gave to MHC Satbir and it was taken into possession by SI Kurda Ram vide recovery memo Ex.PB. PW-4 UGC Manohar Lal, who is formal witness, tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PC. PW-5 MHC Satbir tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PD and also deposed regarding recording of formal FIR Ex.PF. PW-6 Constable Karan Singh, who is also formal witness, tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PG. PW-7 Satyavir Singh mainly deposed that on 21.05.2002, he had gone to his tube-well in the revenue estate of village Salimabad. He heard someone crying and reached at th