Back
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
BHAWANI SINGH,D.P.SOOD
STATE OF H.P. - Appellant
Versus
RAJ KUMAR - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 1982
Decided On : 07/16/1993
CRIMINAL LAW - THEFT - IDOL OF LORD VISHNOO - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - CHAIN OF CIRCUMSTANCES - INFERENCE OF GUILT - TESTS - ADMISSIBILITY OF DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - INVOLVEMENT OF ACCUSED - RELIANCE ON EVIDENCE - SUSPICION VS. PROOF.
Fact of the Case:
The idol of Lord Vishnoo was stolen from Hari Rai temple in Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, on the intervening night of 6th and 7th May, 1971. The idol was later recovered from a godown of a Clearing Agent at Bombay on June 23, 1971. Three persons, namely, S/Sh. Bali Ram, Raj Kumar, and Jagdish Bahadur, were initially charged with theft and sale of the idol. However, Bali Ram and Jagdish Bahadur expired during the trial, and Raj Kumar was declared a proclaimed offender. The trial continued against Gokal Chand, the brother of the deceased accused Hira Lai, who was charged with receiving and disposing of the stolen idol.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court acquitted Gokal Chand, holding that the prosecution evidence was insufficient to establish his involvement in the crime. The court found that the disclosure statement of Bali Ram, upon which the prosecution relied to link Gokal Chand to the crime, was inadmissible as it was made after a prolonged police interrogation. The court also found that the other pieces of evidence, such as letters and railway receipts, were either inadmissible or inconclusive.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established a complete chain of circumstances to prove the guilt of Gokal Chand beyond reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the disclosure statement of Bali Ram was admissible in evidence. 3. Whether the other pieces of evidence, such as letters and railway receipts, were sufficient to establish Gokal Chand's involvement in the crime.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances to prove Gokal Chand's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court found that the disclosure statement of Bali Ram was inadmissible as it was made after a prolonged police interrogation. The court also found that the other pieces of evidence, such as letters and railway receipts, were either inadmissible or inconclusive. 2. The court held that the disclosure statement of Bali Ram was inadmissible in evidence as it was made after a prolonged police interrogation. The court relied on the principle that a confession made after a prolonged police interrogation is involuntary and, therefore, inadmissible. 3. The court held that the other pieces of evidence, such as letters and railway receipts, were either inadmissible or inconclusive. The court found that some of the documents were not properly authenticated or were hearsay. The court also found that the evidence was contradictory and did not provide a clear link between Gokal Chand and the crime.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the impugned judgment of the trial court, which had acquitted Gokal Chand.
D. P. Sood, J.—Sometimes selfishness and greed over-ride the religious faith and spiritual morale of a human being. Even greed has not spared The Almighty—Lord Vishnoo, who is the Creator of the universe.
2. Chamba is situated by the side of Ravi river amidst the sub-mountainous region of Himalayas. There is a ‘chaugan in Chamba town. On one corner of chaugan, there is a temple known as "Hari Rai temple" where an idol of Lord Vishaooof immense value is installed. Hindus residing in this town offer puja and worship Lord Vishnoo. This idol made of bronze was 4-5 feet in height and 1-1/2 feet in width having four hands. A brass plate indicating the identity of the idol was also affixed thereupon.
3. In between the intervening night of 6th and 7th of May, 1971, this idol was found stolen and ultimately it was recovered from a godown of a Clearing Agent at Bombay on June 23, 1971 by the police of Chamba in collaboration with the local police of Metropolitan City of Bombay. The said idol was brought back to Chamba on July 5, 1971 and installed in the aforesaid temple on July 7, 1971.
4. Shortly stated, the case of the prosecution is that three persons, namely, S/Sh. Bali Ram, Raj Kumar and Jagdish Bahadur jointly committed theft of the aforesaid idol on the date, time; and place earlier referred to. This idol was brought by them to Delhi and allegedly sold to one Shri Hira Lai accused (since deceased) in consideration of Rs. 10,000. The prosecution aver that the said accused Hira Lal received this idol knowing fully well that the same is a stolen property. It is then alleged that thereafter he, with the help of his brother Gokal Chand, disposed it of at Delhi to one Shri Mannu Malwani, his co-accused in consideration of Rs. 1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only), one of the partners of M/s. Malwani and Co. of Bombay. Later on Mannu Malwani, with the help of Sh. B. S. Lama, knowing the said article to be a stolen property, attempted to dispose it of by settling its price in the sum of Rs. 50,00,000 (Rupees fifty lacs only) with a foreign antique dealer of London.
5. This case has a chequered history. At this stage, it would be pertinent to note that before charge could be framed against all the accused persons, S/Sh. Jagdish Bahadur and Bali Ram expired., Resultantly, their names were struck off vide orders dated 27-5-1978 and 7-4-1979 respectively. Mannu Malwani accused was declared to be a proclaimed offender vide order dated 22-7-1987. Accordingly, charge was framed against the remaining accused only. Shri Raj Kumar was charge-sheeted for the commission of the offence under sections 380/457, I. P. C, whereas his other co-accused namely, Hira Lai, Gokal Chand and B. S. Lama were charged for the commission of the offence under sections 411 and 414, IRC.
6. During the course of the trial, Raj Kumar accused was also declared as a proclaimed offender. However, his other co-accused S/Sh. Hira Lai and B. S. Lama expired. The trial continued only against Gokal Chand accused.
7. We may now proceed to closely examine the facts and circumstances of the case, which form the background indicating the involvement of Gokal Chand accused.
8. Ishwari "Parshad (PW 1) was the pujari of Hari Rai Temple aforesaid. He used to offer puja daily in the said temple. On May 6, 1971, this witness after performing puja locked the door of the temple at 7.00 p. m. and came home. The entrance door of the temple had iron rods in a portion of it, through which devotees of Lord Vishnoo could have darshan irrespective of the door of the temple remaining locked. One of the devotees, namely, Smt Punni (PW 4), a local resident, as usual came to the temple for having darshan of Lord Vishnoo on 7-5-1971 at about 5.00 a, m. She found the idol missing from inside the temple, Immediately, she informed her husband Budhia Ram (since deceased). The latter sent his daughter Darshana (PW 3) for imparting intimation to Ishwari Parshad, Pujari\ whereas he himself proceeded to intimate t
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
