In a criminal appeal against acquittal, the appellate court will not interfere with concurrent findings unless perverse; a conviction cannot be sustained on the testimony of a sole witness whose version is riddled with material contradictions, improvements, and unnatural conduct, nor on circumstantial evidence that fails to form a complete, unbroken chain of guilt.

Judgment

BY THE COURT: (PER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR)

1. The instant D.B. Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the appellant–State of Rajasthan under Sections 378 (iii) & (i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the accused respondents namely (1) Chandra Ram son of Bhiyan Ram, (2) Bhiyan Ram son of Jai Ram, and (3) Smt. Kalki wife of Bhiyan Ram, assailing the validity of the judgment dated 29.04.2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track No. 1), Pali, in Sessions Case No. 25/2004 (68/2004), whereby the accused-respondents have been acquitted of the offences under Sections 120-B , 302 and 201 IPC.

2. As per the prosecution case, the complainant Mangi Lal submitted a written report (Ex.P-3) on 27.04.2004 at about 10:00 AM to the Station House Officer, Police Station Jaitaran, at the graveyard of village Lototi, stating therein that his daughter Smt. Mokli Devi had been married to accused-respondent Chandra Ram about three years prior to the incident. It was alleged that for about two years, the matrimonial life of the deceased remained peaceful, however, for the last one year; she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband Chandra Ram and her in-laws, namely Bhiyan Ram and Smt. Kalki. About three months prior to the incident, she was allegedly assaulted by the accused respondents, during which Bhiyan Ram inflicted a lathi blow on her head, causing bleeding injuries. It was further alleged that upon being asked about the reason for such cruelty, the deceased disclosed to her parents that her father-in-law Bhiyan Ram, being habitual drunkard, had been attempting to outrage her modesty, and when she narrated these facts to her husband, he ignored the same. It was also stated that the deceased had a female child aged about one and a half years and was pregnant for about six months at the relevant time. Thereafter, the complainant along with certain villagers visited the matrimonial home of the deceased to resolve the dispute, but the accused respondents allegedly threatened that they would mutilate and kill her. It was further alleged that on 26.04.2004, the complainant’s brother Dagla Ram informed him that the accused respondents, namely Bhiyan Ram, Smt. Kalki, Chandra Ram and others, had conspired and murdered Smt. Mokli Devi and were attempting to destroy evidence of her dead body. Upon receiving this information, the complainant along with several villagers reached village Lototi, where neither the accused-respondents nor the dead body of the deceased was found in the house. Subsequently, they reached the graveyard where the dead body of Smt. Mokli Devi was being cremated. The fire was extinguished and a half-burnt body was recovered. Blood-stained clothes (kafan) were also found at the spot.

3. On the basis of the said information, a formal FIR No. 115/2004 was registered at Police Station Jaitaran, District Pali for the offences under Sections 302/34, 201 and 120-B IPC.

4. After completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against the accused-respondents before the Court of learned ACJM, Jaitaran, from where the case, being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, was c