Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, Alok Kumar Verma, JJ.
Rakesh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 352 of 2014
Decided On : 22-02-2021
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860, Secs. 302, 307 and 506 – Accused/appellant was residing in the house of deceased on rent – Accused inflicted the pole axe (Gandasa) on her right hand of daughter of informant as a result of thereof it was cut and swinged – She died due to excessive blood less – Conviction and sentence u/S 302, IPC – Criminal appeal by accused – The pole axe (Gandasa) was recovered from the bushes at the instance of the accused – PW-3 has supported the prosecution case and had seen the accused who was running away with the Gandasa – PW-1 (father of deceased) and PW-2 (mother of deceased) are eye-witnesses of the incident – They have vividly narrated about the role of involvement of accused in committing the crime – There is no reason for them to falsely implicate the appellant – According to FSL report, human blood was found on the bed sheet, slippers of deceased, on the shirt of accused and on the recovered Gandasa – The blow from Gandasa was sufficient to cause death of the deceased in the ordinarily course of nature – Appellant had intention and knowledge about the consequence of his violent act – Hence offence of murder has been committed by the appellant who wanted to pressurize the deceased to accept his proposal for marriage which she died refused – No interference required with the impugned judgment – Appeal dismissed.
(Paras 30 to 33 and 43 to 45)
(B) Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Sec. 134 – Number of witnesses – Plurality of evidence is not at all required for bringing home the guilt of the accused – Any hard and fast rule that a particular number of witnesses should be required to prove a particular offence, would hamper the administration of justice. (Para 26)
¼v½ Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 302] 307 ,oa 506 & vfHk;qDr@vihykFkhZ e`rdk ds ?kj ij fdjk, ij jg jgk Fkk & vfHk;qDr us lwpuk nkrk dh iq=h ds nk;sa gkFk ij MaMk ;qDr dqYgkM+h ¼xaMkls½ ls izgkj fd;k] ftlds QyLo:i mldk gkFk dV dj ढ/UL>wy x;k & vR;f/kd jDrlzko ds dkj.k mldh e`R;q gks xbZ & /kkjk 302] Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds varxZr vfHk;qDr dh nks"kflf) o n.Mkns'k & vfHk;qDr }kjk nkf.Md vihy & vfHk;qDr dh fu'kkunsgh ij MaMk ;qDr dqYgkM+h ¼xaMklk½ ढ/UL>kfM+;ksa ls cjken fd;k x;k Fkk PW-3 us vfHk;kstu ekeys dk leFkZu fd;k gS vkSj vfHk;qDr dks ml le; ns[kk Fkk] tc og xaMklk gkFk esa ysdj Hkkx jgk Fkk & PW-1 ¼e`rdk dk firk½ vkSj PW-2 ¼e`rdk dh ekrk½ ?kVuk ds p{kqn'khZ lk{khx.k gSa & mUgksaus vijk/k dkfjr djus esa vfHk;qDr dh lafyIrrk ds fo"k; esa foLr`r :i ls o.kZu fd;k gS & vihykFkhZ dks ढ/UL>wBk Q¡lkus ds fy, muds ikl dksbZ dkj.k ugha gS & FSL vk[;k ds vuqlkj] fcLrj dh pknj] e`rdk ds pIiy] vfHk;qDr dh deht ,oa cjken fd;s x;s xaMkls ij ekuo jDr ik;k x;k Fkk & xaMkls dk izgkj izÑfr ds lkekU; vuqØe esa e`rdk dh e`R;q dkfjr djus ds fy, i;kZIr Fkk & vihykFkhZ dks vius mDr fgald ÑR; dkfjr djus dk vk'k; Fkk rFkk bls mlds ifj.kke dh tkudkjh Fkh & vr% vihykFkhZ }kjk gR;k dk vijk/k dkfjr fd;k x;k gS] og e`rdk ij fookg dk izLrko Lohdkj djus gsrq ncko Mkyuk pkgrk Fkk] ftlls mlus bUdkj dj fn;k Fkk & vk{ksfir fu.kZ; esa fdlh gLr{ksi dh vko';drk ugha gS & vihy [kkfjtA ¼izLrj 30 ls 33 vkSj 43 ls 45½
¼c½ Hkkjrh; lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872] /kkjk 134 & lkf{k;ksa dh la[;k & vfHk;qDr ds vijk/k nks"k dks Li"V djus ds fy, lk{; dh cgqyrk iw.kZr;k vko';d ugha gS & ,slk dksbZ Hkh dfBu vkSj Rofjr fu;e fd fdlh fof'k"V vijk/k dks lkfcr djus ds fy, lkf{k;ksa dh fdlh fof'k"V la[;k dh vko';drk gS U;k; ds iz'kklu ij djsxkA ¼izLrj 26½
JUDGMENT
Alok Kumar Verma, J. - This instant appeal has been filed by the appellant-accused, against the judgment dated 29.09.2014 passed by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Rishikesh, District Dehradun, in Sessions Trial No.77 of 2012, "State vs. Rakesh", by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default imprisonment.
2. Briefly stated the prosecution story as it emerges from re-appreciation of the evidence on record is that an information was given by the informant Ramesh Kumar (PW-1) to the In-charge Kotwali, Rishikesh, District Dehradun, through his written information (Ex-Ka1) that one Vimla Devi lived in his neighbourhood. The accused Rakesh was residing in her house on rent. On 14.03.2012 at around 01:30 p.m., Km. Suman, daughter of the informant, was grinding spice in her house. The accused Rakesh came there and took her to his room saying he had to talk to her. After a while, she screamed. When the informant along with his wife, Smt. Laxmi (PW-2), and his daughter reached at the spot on hearing the shout of Km. Suman, they noticed that in his room, the accused inflicted a pole axe (Gandasa) blowon her neck with intention to kill her. When his daughter, Km. Suman, raised her right hand up in defence, the blow of the pole axe (Gandasa) hit her right hand. In this incident, her hand was cut and swinged. The accused threatened to kill them, and fled from another door of his room with the said pole axe (Gandasa). The injured, Km. Suman was taken to the Government Hospital, Rishikesh, where her injuries were examined by Dr. Harish Driwedi (PW-7). She was referred to the Jolly Grant Hospital due to excessive blood loss.
3. The First Information Report (Ex-Ka11) was registered on 14.03.2012, at 15:20 hrs, by the Constable Roshan Rana (PW-5) against the accused under Section 307 and Section 506 of IPC.
4. The injured Km. Suman died at around 04:40 p.m. on 14.03.2012. The inquest proceedings and the Post-Mortem Examination were conducted on 15.03.2012.
5. The investigation was started by the Sub-Inspector Kundan Singh Rana (PW-8). On the identification of the informant, he prepared a site plan (Ex-Ka20) of the place of occurrence. He took simple and blood stained earth and blood stained white bed-sheet (Ex-2) from the room of the accused, and prepared its memo (Ex-Ka3) in the presence of Ramesh Kumar (PW1). A pair of slippers (Chappals) (Ex-4,5) of the deceased was taken by the Sub-Inspector Kundan Singh Rana and prepared its memo (Ex-Ka2). He was informed by the informant that his daughter had died during her treatment in the Jolly Grant Hospital. Therefore, the matter was converted into a case of murder.
6. The Inspector Ravindra Kumar (PW-9) was second Investigation Officer, who took the charge of the investigation from the Sub-Inspector Kundan Singh Rana on 15.03.2012. The accused was arrested at around 20:25 hrs, on 15.03.2012, by the Sub-Inspector Pratap Singh Negi (PW-4).
7. At around 23:20 hrs on 15.03.2012, an pole axe (Gandasa) (Ex-13) was recovered from the bushes at the instance of the accused. The said pole axe (Gandasa) was recovered in the presence of the informant Ramesh Kumar (PW-1), the witness Soti Ram (PW-3), the Sub-Inspector Pratap Singh Negi (PW-4) and the Inspector Ravindra Kumar (PW-9). The recovered pole axe (Gandasa) was sealed in a cloth (Ex-12) and the recovery memo (Ex-Ka6) was prepared by Ravindra Kumar (PW-9) at the spot of the recovery. He prepared a site map of the place of recovery(Ex-Ka21). At that time, there was blood on the shirt worn by the accused. That shirt (Ex-15) was taken by the Police and sealed it. A memo (Ex-Ka10) was prepared by Ravindra Kumar (PW-9). The accused signed on it.
8. The recovered articles were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Uttarakhand, Dehradun through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehrad
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
