State of U. P. vs Rajendra S/o Chunni Lal

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(All) 631

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Vivek Kumar Birla, Vikas Budhwar, JJ.
State of U.P. – Appellant
Versus
Rajendra S/o Chunni Lal And Others – Respondents
Government Appeal No. -294 of 2022
Decided On : 06-07-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shiv Kumar Pal

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302, 201 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 378(3), 417 – Offence for murder – Appeal in case of acquittal – Power to appoint place of imprisonment – An appeal under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C., 1973 at behest of State of U.P. instituted against judgment and order of acquittal passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Aligarh in Sessions Trial arising out of Case Crime, under Section 302 and 201 IPC, Police Station Lodha, District Aligarh –Held, Court finds that chain to link accused while commissioning crime itself is missing and evidence so sought to be pressed into service, which includes testimony of prosecution witness itself is weak – This Court further finds inability to take a different view from view so taken by learned trial court as obviously while deciding present case, which originates in a shape of an appeal from order of acquittal cannot be stretched too far so as to even take a view once view taken by learned trial court is plausible – Nonetheless, presumption of double innocence is already available with accused and in view of law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court as referred to above this Court is not in a position to interfere with findings so recorded by learned trial court while acquitting accused persons – Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Vikas Budhwar, J.

1. This is an appeal under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C., 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C., 1973) at the behest of State of U.P. instituted against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 9.2.2022 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Aligarh in Sessions Trial No. 943 of 2010 (State of U.P. vs. Rajendra and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 32 of 2009, under Section 302 and 201 IPC, Police Station Lodha, District Aligarh.

2. The factual matrix of the case as worded in the present appeal are that one Munna Lal s/o Munshi Lal resident of village Kadauli, Police Station Lodha, District Aligarh is a watchman of village Kadauli. According to the prosecution case the resident villagers had gone in the north side of the pitch road towards the land of the Land Management Committee for showering water whereat babool trees were planted and in the bushes so enclosing the babool tree they saw a dead body of unknown woman. On being apprised of the said event Munna Lal s/o Munshi Lal proceeded to the site of occurrence whereat he witnessed that an unknown woman was lying over there and a piece of cloth was tied on the neck in a form of a ring, which according to him was for strangulating her and there was a piece of cloth so scattered on the body, which was in burnt condition so as to consign her in flames. According to the prosecution he approached the concerned police station on 16.2.2009 for lodging of first information report. Record further reveals that that one Sri Dev Dutt Sharma s/o Net Ram Sharma resident of Sarsaul Masjid lane, Police Station Banna Devi, District Aligarh had approached the police station Lodha before the Station House Officer in District Aligarh with a statement that he had come to know while reading in a newspaper that a woman corpus was found. According to Dev Dutt Sharma s/o Net Ram Sharma he had gone to the mortuary, wherein he identified the lady as her mother-in-law and accordingly his wife being the daughter of the deceased being Smt. Tarawati on 16.2.2009 reported the matter before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Aligarh. As per the record the first information report was lodged against unknown persons, however, during course of the investigation the accused, who are four in number, were shown to have commissioned the crime and accordingly charge-sheet was submitted in Case Crime No. 32 of 2009 purported to be under Section 302 and 201 IPC.

3. In order to bring home the charges as many as following ten prosecution witnesses were examined:-

1.	Munna Lal	P.W.-1
2.	Rajendra	P.W.-2
3.	Anoop Kumar	P.W.-3
4.	Dev Dutt Sharma	P.W.-4
5.	Vishnu	P.W.-5
6.	S.I. Raj Kumar Singh	P.W.-6
7.	I.O. Ins. Jagpal Singh	P.W.-7
8.	Dr. Suresh Chandra Goel	P.W.-8
9.	S.I. Hariom Sharma	P.W.-9
10.	Ins. Madan Pal Singh	P.W.-10
11.	Veer Pal Singh	P.W.-11

4. The following documentary evidence were exhibited to bring home charges:-

1.	Written Complaint	Ex. A-1
2.	Supurdginama	Ex. A-2
4.	First Information Report	Ex. A-3
3.	Complaint of Dev Dutt Sharma	Ex. A-4
5.	Copy of the report	Ex. A-5
6.	Site Plan	Ex. A-6
7.	Postmortem report	Ex. A-7
8.	Panchayatnama of the deceased	Ex. A-8
9.	Letter no. 33 of Cons.	Ex. A-9
10.	Letter no. 13	Ex. A-10
11.	Letter of the Incharge Officer, Photography Field Unit, Aligarh	Ex. A-11
12.	Letter of the Incharge Officer, Finger Print Bureau, Aligarh	Ex. A-12
13.	Letter of the Reserve Inspector	Ex. A-13
14.	Letter of C.M.O.	Ex. A-14
15.	Letter of Incharge Postmortem Incharge	Ex. A-15
16.	Photo	Ex. A-16
17.	Letter of Postmortem duty mortuary	Ex. A-17
18.	Charge-sheet	Ex. A-18

5. The record fu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(All) 631

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABADVivek Kumar Birla, Vikas Budhwar, JJ.State of U.P. – AppellantVersusRajendra S/o Chunni Lal And Others – RespondentsGovernment Appeal No. -294 of 2022Decided On : 06-07-2022

Cases Referred (51)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Vivek Kumar Birla, Vikas Budhwar, JJ.
State of U.P. – Appellant
Versus
Rajendra S/o Chunni Lal And Others – Respondents
Government Appeal No. -294 of 2022
Decided On : 06-07-2022