Advocates:
['SURESH KUMBHAT', '', 'BK BHATNAGAR', 'PP']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 277/1996

1. Smt. Sayari W/o Shri Malaram, aged 65 years,

2. Smt. Moti Bai Widow of Shri Purkharam, aged 70 years

(Expired)

3. Kanaram S/o Shri Malaram (Expired)

All by caste Sirvi, R/o Atvada, P.S. Sojat, District Pali

----Appellant

Versus

State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Appellant(s)

:

Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, through VC

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

JUDGMENT

DATE OF JUDGMENT

20/01/2022

BY THE COURT:

The instant Criminal Appeal has been preferred by appellants

Smt. Sayari, Moti Bai and Kanaram under Section 374 (2)

Cr.P.C. being aggrieved of the impugned judgment dated

17.04.1996 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Sojat in Sessions Case No.216/1992 whereby, all three accused-

appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:-

Accused-

appellant

Offence

Sentences

Fine and

default

1. Sayari}

2.Moti Bai}

498A IPC

2 Years RI

Rs.1,000/- and

in default to

further undergo

3 moths RI

498A IPC

2 Years RI

Rs.1,000/- and

(2 of 5)

[CRLA-277/1996]

3. Kana Ram

in default to

further undergo

3 moths RI

302 IPC

Life

Imprisonment

Rs.5,000/- and

in default to

further undergo

2 moths RI

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

In nutshell, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the

criminal appeal are noted hereinbelow:-

Complainant Jairam (P.W.19) submitted a written report

(Ex.P/8) to the SHO, Police Station Sojat, District Pali on

28.02.1992 at 12:15 p.m. alleging inter alia that in the morning,

one Budharam Sirvi, resident of Village Atabada, visited his house

and informed his elder brother Pemaram that his daughter Indra

(Pemaram’s daughter) was not well so they had to visit her at her

house. On this, all the family members went to Indra’s house,

where they saw that dead body of Indra was lying on the floor and

blood stains were found on her mouth. They asked to Kanaram on

which, he feigned ignorance by saying that on previous night, he

was at his aunt’s house and when he returned back in the morning

he saw that Indra was hanging by a noose.

On the basis of this report, FIR No.50/1992(Ex.P/36) came

to be registered at the Police Station Sojat, District Pali for the

offences under Sections 498A and 304B IPC and investigation was

commenced.

The usual investigation was undertaken. The dead body of

Indra was subjected to postmortem by a Medical Jurist at

Government Hospital, Sojat, which issued a postmortem report

(3 of 5)

[CRLA-277/1996]

(Ex.P/18) wherein, cause of death was opined to be asphyxia due

to strangulation.

The accused-appellants were arrested vide Memos Ex.P/13,

Ex.P/14 and Ex.P/37 and weapon of offence i.e. knife vide Memo

Ex.P/15 and their own blood stained clothes vide Memo Ex.P/34

were recovered by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

Ultimately, after completing the investigation, a charge sheet

came to be filed against the accused-appellants Sayari and Moti

Bai for the offence under Section 498A and against accused

Kanaram for the offence under Sections 498A and 302 IPC in the

court concerned.

As the offence under Section 302 IPC was exclusively triable

by the Court of Sessions the case was committed to the Court of

Sessions Judge, Pali, from where, it was transferred to the Court

of Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat for trial where charges were

framed against the accused-appellants for the above offences.

They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution

examined as many as 31 witnesses and exhibited 38 documents

to prove its case. The accused-appellants were questioned under

Section 313 CrPC and upon being confronted with the

circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution

evidence, they denied the same and claimed to be innocent.

However, no oral evidence was