Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 12739

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 465/2015

Kamlesh Kumar son of Laxman Prasad, Aged about 22 years,
Resident of Hanuman ki Dhani, Tan Dhaniya, Panchayat
Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
(At present accused petitioner confined in Jhunjhunu Jail)
----Accused-Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Fatehchand Saini, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Punia, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

01/04/2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Fatehchand Saini
For the Respondents: Amit Kumar Punia

In a criminal case resting on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish an unbroken chain of circumstances that excludes every other reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. Failure to prove any link in this chain necessitates an acquittal.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 364 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374 - Murder and Kidnapping - Circumstantial evidence - Requirement of proof - In cases involving circumstantial evidence, it is the sacred duty of the prosecution to prove every link in the chain, which must be strong, dense, complete, and unbroken, leading to the sole conclusion that the crime was committed by the accused and no one else. (Paras 12 and 19)

(B) Evidence - Circumstantial Evidence - Reliability - Prosecution failed to establish the chain of circumstances; witnesses turned hostile, and the alleged recovery of the weapon was discredited due to lack of forensic evidence and contradictions in the investigation. (Paras 14, 15, 17 and 18)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted by the trial court for the offences of kidnapping and murder of a woman, with the prosecution alleging intent to loot her jewelry. The case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including the alleged sightings of the accused with the deceased and the subsequent recovery of a weapon. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the evidence was insufficient and that investigations were flawed.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the circumstances beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence regarding the deceased being seen with the appellant was contradictory and uncorroborated. Furthermore, the recovery of the weapon was dubious, lacking forensic confirmation or blood residue, and the recovery of the body was not documented through proper seizure memos. Therefore, the broken chain of evidence left room for doubt.

Issues: The main issues were whether the accused had kidnapped and murdered the victim to steal her ornaments and whether the conviction passed by the trial court was legally sustainable based on the available evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution failed to present a complete and unbreakable chain of circumstantial evidence required for conviction in such cases. Due to the failure of substantive witnesses and the lack of scientific or reliable corroborative evidence, the court found the guilt of the accused was not established beyond reasonable doubt.

Result: Appeal allowed; the judgment and order of conviction are set aside and the appellant is acquitted.

Judgment

(PER HON'BLE BHUWAN GOYAL, J.)

1. vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr deys'k dqekj }kjk gLrxr vihy v arxZr /kkjk 374 n-iaz-la- ds rgr fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; vij ls'ku U;k;k/kh'k] la[;k&2] >qU>qu w }kjk ls'ku izdj.k la [;k 72@2013 ¼20@2013½] muokuh izdj.k ljdkj cuke deys'k dqekj es a ikfjr fu.kZ; ,oa n.Mkns'k fnuk ad 08&05&2015 ds fo:) izLrqr dh xbZ gS] ftlds }kjk fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr dks vijk/k v arxZr /kkjk 364] 302 Hkk-n a-la- ds vkjksiks a es a nks"kfl) fd;k tkdj fuEukuqlkj nf.Mr fd;k x;k gS%&

धारा	सजा	अर्थदण्ड	अदम अदायगी अर्थदण्ड
364 भा.द.सं.	05 साल का कठोर कारावास	2,000/- रुपये	02 माह का पृथक से कारावास
302 भा.द.सं.	कठोर आजीवन कारावास	5,000/- रुपये	06 माह का पृथक से कारावास

सभी मूल सजाएं साथ-साथ चलने का आदेश दिया गया है।

2. la{ksi es a izdj.k ds rF; bl izdkj ls gSa fd ifjoknh ds'kjnso ¼ih-M-&4½ us iqfyl Fkkuk uoyx< ds le{k mifLFkr gksdj fnuk ad 14&01&2013 dks ,d rgjhjh fjiksVZ ¼izn'kZ ih-&5½ bl vk'k; dh is'k dh fd fnuk ad 13&01&2013 dks djhc 8-00 cts lqcg mldk lkyk deys'k iq= Lo- Jh y{e.k izlkn] fuoklh guqeku dh

3. mDr fjiksVZ ¼izn'kZ ih-&5½ ds vk/kkj ij iqfyl Fkkuk& uoyx<] ftyk >qU>qu w }kjk izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 29@2013] vUrxZr /kkjk 364] 302 Hkk-n a-la- es a ntZ dj vuqla/kku izkjaHk fd;k x;kA ckn vuqla/kku vfHk;qDr ds fo:) vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 302] 364 Hkk-n a-la- es a vkjksi i= U;k;ky; vfrfjDr eq[; U;kf;d eftLVsªV] uoyx<] ftyk >qU>qu w ds le{k is'k fd;k x;k gS] ftl ij fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk izlaKku fy;k tkdj] ekeyk ls'ku U;k;ky; }kjk fopkj.kh; gksus ls mls ls'ku U;k;k/kh'k] >qU>qu w dks dfeV fd;k x;k] tgk a ls gLrxr izdj.k dkyk arj es a lquokbZ gsrq v arfjr gksdj fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; vij ls'ku U;k;k/kh'k] la[;k&2] >qU>qu w dks izkIr gqvkA

4. fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us cgl pktZ lqudj vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr ds fo:) /kkjk 364] 302 Hkk-n a-l- es a n.Muh; vijk/kks a dk vkjksi fojfpr dj mls lquk;k o le>k;k x;k rks vfHk;qDr us vkjksi ls vLohdkj dj vUoh{kk pkgh] ftl ij vfHk;kstu i{k dh vksj ls ekSf[kd lk{; es a xokgku ih-MCY; w-&1 yxk;r ih-M-&15 ds c;ku ys[kc) djok;s x;s rFkk ekSf[kd lk{; ds leFkZu es a nLrkostkr izn'kZ ih&1 yxk;r izn'kZ ih&13 is'k dj iznf'kZr djok;s x;sA

5. fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk rRi'pkr~ vfHk;qDr dks /kkjk 313 n a-iz-la- ds rgr ijhf{kr fd;k x;k] ftles a vfHk;qDr us xokgku }kjk mlds fo:) xyr lk{; nsuk crkrs gq, dFku fd;k fd mlus fdlh dks ugh a ekjk gS] mls bl izdj.k es a >wBk Q alk;k x;k gS] mls bl izdj.k es a ds'kj ij 'kd gS ,oa lk{; lQkbZ es a xokg Mh-M-&1 txnh'k izlkn dks izLrqr dj mldh lk{; ys[kc) djok;h xbZ ,oa nLrkosth lk{; es a nLrkost izn'kZ Mh-&1 ,oa izn'kZ Mh&2 is'k dj iznf'kZr djok, x,A

6. fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk mHk;i{kks a dks lquus ds i'pkr~ vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr deys'k dqekj dks vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 364] 302 Hkk-n a-la- es a mijksDr vuqlkj nf.Mr fd;k x;k] ftlls O;fFkr gksdj vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr ds }kjk gLrxr vihy mls vkjksfir vijk/kks a ls nks"keqDr fd, tkus gsrq izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

7. izLrqr ekeys es a gekjs le{k izeq[k :i ls fopkj.kh; fcUn w ;g gS fd&

1. vk;k vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr us fnuk ad 13&01&2013 dks izkr% 8-00 cts ifjoknh ds'kjnso dh ekrk ';ksdksjh nsoh }kjk iguh gqbZ pk anh dh dfM+;k a fudkyus ds vk'k; ls mldk vigj.k dj] mlds flj ij gFkkSMs dh pksVs a igqpk adj mldh gR;k dkfjr dh\

2. vk;k fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr fu.kZ; fnuk ad 08&05&2015 fof/k lEer ugh a gksus ls vikLr fd;s tkus ;ksX; gS\

8. fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr dk dFku gS fd izLrqr ekeys es a ?kVuk dk dksbZ izR;{kn'khZ lk{kh izLrqr ugh a gqvk gSA mudk ;g Hkh dFku gS fd izdj.k es a ?kVuk ds fnu e`rdk ';ksdksjh dks vihykFkhZ&vfHkqDr ds lkFk ns[kus ds xokg cqyh mQZ lanhi ,oa f'k'kqiky dh lk{; fo'oluh; ugh a gS] D;ks afd xokg cqyh mQZ lanhi us mldk e`rdk dks ugh a tkuuk ,oa muds uke iqfyl dks ugh a crkuk vius c;kuks a es a Lohdkj fd;k gSA mudk ;g dFku gS fd xokg cqyh mQZ lanhi ls e`rdk dh yk'k dh dksbZ igpku dk;Zokgh Hkh ugh a djokbZ xbZ gSA mudk ;g Hkh dFku gS fd bl lanHkZ es a vU; lk{kh f'k'kqiky us viuh izfrijh{kk es a iqfylokyks a ds crk, vuqlkj c;ku nsuk Lohdkj fd;k gSA mudk dFku gS fd vihykFkhZ&

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 12739

In a criminal case resting on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish an unbroken chain of circumstances that excludes every other reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. Failure to prove any link in this chain necessitates an acquittal.

Cases Referred (1)