[2025:RJ-JD:41913-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1190/2016 Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Budhram, B/c Valmiki, R/o Village Fatehpur, PS Sangariya, Tehsil & District Hanumangarh.

----Appellant Versus State of Rajasthan ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anees Bhurat, amicus curiae For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shrawan Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

Judgment

Order reserved on 18/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23/ 09/2025 BY THE COURT : (PER HON’BLE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GARG,J)

Instant criminal jail appeal has been received by post on behalf of the appellant through Jailer, Central Jail, Bikaner challenging the judgment dated 11.11.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangariya, District Hanumangarh, in Sessions Case No.09/2016 by which the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1,01,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one year additional S.I.

Brief facts necessary to be noted for deciding the controversy are that on 12.01.2016, complainant- Rampratap submitted a typed report to the SHO, PS Sangariya to the effect that his younger brothers, Krishna and Ashok Kumar, were residing together in the same house. On the previous evening, both Krishna and Ashok, along with the complainant’s niece- Priyanka, had retired for the night. The following morning, at approximately 07:00 AM, the complainant visited Krishna’s room to wake him up. Upon knocking on the door and receiving no response, the accused- Ashok, allegedly informed the complainant that he had murdered Krishna. Upon gaining entry into the room, the complainant found Krishna lying deceased on the cot. Furthermore, the complainant’s niece, Priyanka, disclosed that her uncle- Ashok had caused the death of her father- Krishna, by inflicting injuries upon him with a gandasi (a sharp-edged weapon) and a knife.

On the said report, Police registered the FIR No.36/2016 against the accused appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC and started investigation. After thorough investigation, police filed challan against the accused appellant for offence under Section

302 IPC.

Thereafter, learned Trial Court framed, read over and explained the charges for the offence under Section 302 IPC to the accused appellant. He denied the charge and sought trial.

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses and also got exhibited relevant documents in support of its case.

The accused appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. In defence, no witness was examined.

Learned trial Court, after hearing the arguments from both the sides, taking into consideration and appreciating the documentary evidence and the statements of witnesses, vide judgment dated 11.11.2016 convicted and sentenced the accused- appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC as aforesaid.

Hence, this criminal appeal.

Learned amicus curiae- Mr. Anees Bhurat, appearing on behalf of the appellant, has submitted that several prosecution witnesses have categorically deposed that the accused-appellant was present inside the room where the deceased, Krishna, was found lying dead. In view of the same, the appellant was apprehended by the police on the very date of the incident, i.e., 12.01.2016. However, it is noteworthy that the alleged weapons of offence, a gandasi and a knife were recovered only on 14.01.2016, i.e., two days after the incident. Learned counsel has argued that, considering the appellant was found at the scene of the crime and arrested on the spot, it is implausible that the police did not recover the weapons at the time of arrest. It is contended that it defies logic to assume that the appellant, after allegedly committing the offence and remaining inside the room, could have concealed the weapons elsewhere before opening the door for the complainant. This casts serious