Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT PRINCIPAL SEAT JODHPUR
JASVINDRA SINGH AND ORS – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
CRLA 627/2015
MURDER - DELAYED REPORTING - INCONSISTENT TESTIMONY - ACQUITTAL OF CO-ACCUSED - [The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges against the appellants beyond doubt and acquitted them of all charges due to delayed reporting, inconsistent testimony, and the acquittal of co-accused.]
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, along with others, assaulted the victim and caused his death. The appellants denied the charges and claimed that they were not present at the time of the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution's case was based on inconsistent testimony and that the delay in reporting the incident raised doubts about the veracity of the prosecution's version of events. The court also noted that several co-accused had been acquitted in a related case, which further weakened the prosecution's case.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved the charges against the appellants beyond doubt. 2. Whether the delay in reporting the incident affected the reliability of the prosecution's case. 3. Whether the acquittal of co-accused in a related case had any bearing on the present case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against the appellants beyond doubt. The court relied on the following factors: 1. The delay in reporting the incident raised doubts about the veracity of the prosecution's version of events. 2. The testimony of the prosecution witnesses was inconsistent. 3. Several co-accused had been acquitted in a related case, which further weakened the prosecution's case.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellants of all charges and set aside their conviction.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 627/2015
1. Jasvindra Singh S/o Sh. Gurdayal Singh, B/c Sikh, R/o Village
Dholipal, Tehsil & Distt. Hanumangarh.
2. Jaskaran Singh S/o Shri Lal Singh, B/c Sikh, R/o Village
Dholipal, Tehsil & Distt. Hanumangarh.
3. Gucharan Singh S/o Sh. Karnail Singh, B/c Sikh, R/o Village
Dholipal, Tehsil & Distt. Hanumangarh.
4. Kulvindra Singh S/o Sh. Gurdayal Singh, B/c Sikh, R/o Village
Dholipal, Tehsil & Distt. Hanumangarh.
5. Darshan Singh S/o Sh. Harnek Singh, B/c Sikh, R/o Village
Dholipal, Tehsil & Distt. Hanumangarh.
6. Sukha @ Sukhraj Singh S/o Sh. Karnail Singh, B/c Sikh, R/o
Village Dholipal, Tehsil & Distt. Hanumangarh.
7. Balkaran Singh S/o Sh. Lal Singh, B/c Sikh, R/o Village
Dholipal, Tehsil & Distt. Hanumangarh.
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s)
:
Mr. Dhirendra Singh
Mr. Rajeev Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC
Mr. SS Gour for Mr. R.S. Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
Judgment
Date Judgment Reserved: 02/01/2022
Date of Pronouncement: 07/01/2022
Per Justice Birendra Kumar
1.
All the seven appellants along with others faced trial in
Sessions case No.94/2012 before learned Additional Judge No.2
(2 of 9)
[CRLA-627/2015]
Hanumangarh and where found guilty for offence under Sections
302/149, 148 and 342/149 IPC.
The learned trial Judge awarded rigorous imprisonment for
life and fine of Rs.5,000/- for offence under Section 302/149 IPC
and in default of payment of fine, further two months rigorous
imprisonment was ordered.
For offence under Section 148 IPC one year’s rigorous
imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/-was awarded and in default of
payment, additional 10 days imprisonment was ordered.
For offence under Section 342/149 IPC, six month rigorous
imprisonment was awarded along with fine of Rs.200/- and in
default of payment of fine, five days simple imprisonment was
ordered. Sentences are to run concurrently.
The judgment of conviction dated 17.06.2015 and order of
sentence of the same date are under challenge in this appeal.
2.
It is worth to mention here that besides the appellants seven
others were also named in the FIR.
Out of total 14 accused persons named in the FIR, four
persons were not sent up by the Police for trial, they were Sukha
Singh @ Sukhdev Singh, Gurpreet Singh @ Preet Singh, Amarjeet
Kaur and Gurdeep Kaur. However in exercise of power under
Section 319 Cr.P.C. the learned trial Judge summoned them to
face the trial and accordingly they faced trial. Two of the accused
namely Gurdayal Singh and Lal Singh died before the trial court
judgment.
Co-accused Tarsem Singh @ Chema Singh, Sukha Singh @
Sukhdev Singh, Gurpreet Singh @ Preet Singh, Amarjeep Kaur
and Gurdeep Kaur were allowed benefit of doubt by the learned
trial Judge by the same Judgment on the ground that the
(3 of 9)
[CRLA-627/2015]
Investigating Officer PW-13 deposed that during the investigation
he had not found the allegation against the acquitted accused as
true.
3.
Jaspreet Singh, the informant of the case, challenged the
acquittal of Tarsem Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Gurpreet Singh,
Amarjeep Kaur and Gurdeep Kaur in D.B. Criminal Appeal
No.676/2015.
While dismissing the aforesaid appeal on merit a Division
Bench of this Court concluded as follows:
“After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we have
perused the entire evidence. Admittedly there is no specific
allegation against any of the accused persons, …..”
“In our opinion, when no specific allegation to inflict
injury and participation is levelled against respondents No.2
to 6 nor any evidence of enmity with deceased is on record
against the respondents No.2 to 6, then there is no question
to hold that error has been committed by the trial court in
acquitting the respondents No.2 to 6 from the charges
leve
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
