[2025:RJ-JP:33122-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Appeal No.569/1996

1. Shyam @ Chhanga Son Of Shri Vishambhar Dayal (Expired), Resident Of Jat Behror, Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar Rajasthan

2. Panga Alias Rajendra Son Of Fateh Singh Jat, Resident Of Jat Behror, Police Station Mundawar District Alwar Rajasthan ----Appellants Versus State of Rajasthan through PP ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr.Sunil Shekhawat, Adv. with Mr.Aditya Raj, Adv.

Mr.Mohit Balwada, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr.Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP &

Mr.Sudesh Kumar Saini, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

JUDGMENT

21/08/2025 AVNEESH JHINGAN,J:-

This appeal was preferred by Shyam @ Chhanga and Panga @ Rajendra against the judgment dated 30.09.1996 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Behror, District Alwar in Sessions Case No.88/1992, convicting the accused-appellants under Section 302 IPC. Vide order of even date, the appellants were sentenced life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- was imposed. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months simple imprisonment.

2. During pendency of this appeal, Shyam @ Chhanga expired and the appeal was abated qua appellant No.1—Shyam @ Chhanga on 22.09.2015. The appeal survives for Panga @

Rajendra (hereinafter referred to as ‘appellant’).

3. The facts as set up by the prosecution are that on 16.01.1991 Amilal Yadav lodged a complaint that in evening of 15.01.1991 at about 7:00 PM, he along-with his brother Dharampal (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) were at their shop when the complainant left for village. On 16.01.1991 at about 10.30 AM complainant brought food for the deceased but found that shop was locked. The complainant waited till 4o’ clock and then on opening the shop after cutting the lock, found the deceased lying dead on a bench. A woolen gents shawl (hereinafter referred to as ‘shawl’) was wrapped like a noose around the neck of the deceased. In the shop a glass lying on the table reeked of alcohol. The cutting of the mattress on which the deceased vomited, a woolen cap and the liquor from the glass after sealing in a bottle were recovered from the site and seizure memo Ex.P.12 was prepared. PW-11 Sundar Lal and PW- 14 complainant were witnesses of recovery memo. FIR No.11/1991 was registered at Police Station Shahjahanpur, Alwar. During investigation Shyamlal @ Chhanga and appellant were nominated as accused. Recovery of key of the lock of the shop was made at the instance of Shyamlal @ Chhanga. After filing the charge-sheet, charges were framed under Sections 302 and 380 IPC. In a statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., it was stated to be a case of false implication and trial was claimed. The prosecution examined eighteen witnesses and exhibited thirty two documents. In defence, two documents were exhibited. The trial court on considering the facts and appreciating the evidence convicted the accused. Hence, the present appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant was falsely framed. The identification parade was a sham. The appellant after being arrested was taken by the police to the house of PW-1 Dinesh Kumar where he had seen the appellant. The argument is that recovery of key of the lock was after three months that too from a mustard field. Reliance is placed upon the depositions of PW-6 Brahmprakash and PW-15 Devendra Kumar to argue that signatures of the recovery witnesses were taken on the blank paper by the police. The variation in the contents of the complainant PW-14 and deposition of PW-12 Balbeer Singh is relied to argue that it is doubtful as to who opened the shop.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that PW-1 Dinesh Kumar had last seen appellant with the deceased on the night of 15.01.1991. It is argued that the key of lock of the shop was recovered at the instance of Shyamlal. The woolen cap of appellant was recovered from the shop, it is fortifi