Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Naresh Meghwal vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 22 January, 2019
Author: Munishwar Nath Bhandari
Bench: Munishwar Nath Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 412/2014
Naresh Meghwal son of Shri Mathura Lal B/c Meghwal R/o Moi
Khurd, PS Sangod, District Kota, Rajasthan
(At present confined in Central Jail, Kota).
----Accused-Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through PP
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Abdul Kalam Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mrs.Sonia Shandilya, Public
Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA Judgment 22/01/2019 This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 03rd March, 2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Kota in Session Case No.127/2012, whereby, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :
"For offence under Section 302 IPC - Life Imprisonment and Rs.25,000/- fine and in default of fine, he shall further undergo for 6 month SI.
For offence under Section 379 IPC - 2 year RI & Rs.10,000/- fine and in default of fine, he shall further undergo for 1 month SI."
It is a case where, the police received a message at around 8.30 AM on 28th December, 2011 about dead body of a lady in a "nala" near the Open University and FCI Godown. On the aforesaid, a written report was given by the complainant Dinesh Kumar Gautam. Therein, it was stated that he is residing in House (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:57 PM) (2 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014] No.39, Keshavpura, Sector 6 and working in Rajiv Gandhi Boys Hostel. His wife, deceased Nandkanwar, was earlier working in Rudrabhishek, Indravihar Hostel. The accused Naresh Meghwal was also working in the same hostel. He is now working with him as a helper for last eight months. The deceased also started working there. His wife and the accused Naresh Meghwal used to serve in marriages and parties. The accused was in contact with the deceased on mobile. The complainant asked the deceased not to keep relation with accused Naresh Meghwal. The deceased had shown her annoyance on the aforesaid.
It was also stated that on 27th December, 2011 when he returned to his home at around 10.30 PM, his wife was not available. He asked about her to his daughter Chanchal. She informed that deceased received a phone call from Naresh Meghwal, who called her and accordingly, she left the house at around 7.00 PM. The complainant had given call to his wife and accused but their mobile phones were switched off. He then enquired about availability of wife at his in-laws' place but she had not gone there. It was late night, thus he could not make search.
In the morning, he came to know that his wife's dead body was found near open University. The ornaments of the deceased were found missing so as the mobile phone. He had shown suspicion on the accused Naresh Meghwal while lodging the FIR, accordingly, after registration of the case, police caused investigation and finding a case against the accused, charge sheet was filed. The trial Court framed charges and explained it to the accused. He denied the charges, thus trial commenced. (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:57 PM)
(3 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014]
In the trial, the prosecution produced seventeen
witnesses and fifty three documents to prove their case while statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The trial Court found a case against the accused, thus convicted and sentenced him for the offence under Section 302 and 379 IPC.
In the investigation, police could recover a "Mangalsutra" and other ornaments of the deceased apart from pair of slippers. Two buttons with red thread were found near the place of occurrence matching to the buttons of accused's shirt recovered at his instance. The footprints were also taken by police. Clothes of the accused were recovered at his instance. The call details of phone numbers of the deceased and accused were taken where location of the accused was found near the place of occurrence at the relevant time. It is also that the accused and deceased had a last call and accordingly, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that if accused had any relation with deceased then there was no reason to cause murder. In fact, it can be husband of the deceased. Thus, in this case, it is the complainant, who was involved in the case and to come out from it, the appellant was falsely implicated. It is moreso when, there were money transactions between deceased and the accused. It has come that the accused was giving money to the deceased, thus offence under Section 302 IPC could not have been caused by the appellant for taking ornaments. No motive to cause the occurrence exists.
So far as the recovery of ornaments and mobile phone apart from buttons of shirt of the accused, etc. are concerned, it is (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:57 PM) (4 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014] nothing but planted by the police to create evidence against the accused. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. The prosecution otherwise failed to bring a chain of circumstances to connect the accused-appellant with the crime. The prayer is accordingly to set aside the order passed by the trial Court and acquit the appellant.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments made by learned counsel for the appellant. It is submitted that accused was having relation with the deceased. It is proved by the statement of the complainant PW - 1 Dinesh Kumar Gautam. It is corroborated by PW - 5 Chanchal and even by the call details. The aforesaid could prove relation of the accused-appellant with the deceased. There were money transactions between them and it seems that when the accused demanded his money and the deceased refused to return it, the occurrence was caused.
The location of the accused-appellant at 7.36 PM on the day of occurrence was near the place of occurrence and otherwise, the ornaments of the deceased were recovered at the instance of the accused-appellant apart from a mobile phone. The recovery of ornaments, etc. was from a box. The key of which was recovered from the accused-appellant at the time of arrest, therefore, to open the box, the accused asked to bring the key seized at the time of arrest. The buttons of the shirt of accused were recovered at the place of occurrence apart from thread matching to the buttons and thread of the shirt recovered at the instance of the accused-appellant, thus it is not only that there was motive for the appellant to cause the occurrence but last mobile call shows that the accused-appellant called deceased and on the aforesaid call, (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:57 PM) (5 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014] the deceased went out of the house to meet the accused-appellant as per the statement of PW - 5 Chanchal. The deceased did not return thereupon. In view of the above, the prosecution could bring chain of evidence to connect accused with the crime. The trial Court has thus rightly convicted the accused for the offence under Sections 302 and 379 IPC. The prayer is accordingly to maintain the order passed by the trial Court.
We have considered rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.
The police registered a case on the written report by the complainant PW - 1 Dinesh Kumar Gautam. He is none else but the husband of deceased. The accused was working with him and his wife. The deceased and accused had worked at one and the same place and were going out to serve in marriages and parties. He has also stated that the accused was giving money to the deceased out of his salary. It was even when complainant asked him not to do that. On 27th December, 2011, he came to his home around 10.30 PM after completion of his work. His wife was not found available at the residence. He asked about his wife to daughter Chanchal. She informed that deceased received a phone call from the accused and thereafter, she left the house. The complainant called the accused as well as deceased but their mobile phones were found switched off. The search of deceased was made but she could not be traced out and her dead body was found in the next morning near the open University. Her ornaments were found missing. The witness has proved Exhibit P
- 1 written report, identification memo of dead body Exhibit P - 3 apart from seizure of the ornaments Exhibit P - 6. Exhibit P - 7 is (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:57 PM) (6 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014] seizure memo of one pair of slipper. He has also proved Exhibit P - 12 seizure and recovery memo of jewellery apart from Exhibit P - 13, seizure and recovery memo of clothes of the accused- appellant. The said witness was cross-examined but his statement could not be demolished, rather, he has reiterated that his wife and the accused were working together thus, were knowing each other.
The statement of PW - 1 Dinesh Kumar Gautam has been corroborated by PW - 5 Chanchal. She was at the age of seventeen years. It was stated that her mother and accused were working together at one place. On the day of occurrence, the accused Naresh Meghwal gave a phone call to her mother. She had taken the call and on it, the accused Naresh Meghwal asked to give phone to her mother and thereupon, the call was attended by the deceased. The deceased then left the house at around 7.00 PM. Her father, the complainant Dinesh Kumar Gautam, came at 10.30 PM and asked about her mother. She informed that her mother left the house at around 7.00 PM after receiving a phone call of the accused Naresh Meghwal. The dead body of the deceased was later on found next morning. The statement of the said witness could not be demolished in the cross-examination, rather, she had reiterated the statement in chief.
The statement of PW - 16 Ranvijay Singh is also relevant. It corroborates the statements of PW - 1 Dinesh Kumar Gautam and PW - 5 Chanchal. It is stated that after registration of the case, the investigation was caused. The ornaments of the deceased were recovered at the instance of accused apart from his clothes. The mobile phone of the deceased was also recovered (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:57 PM) (7 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014] at the instance of the accused. The call details of the deceased and accused were taken. As per the call details, the accused and deceased talked to each other before the occurrence. The location of the accused was also taken and it was found near the place of occurrence, i.e., the open University. It was at around 7.36 PM on the day of occurrence.
The footprint was also taken from the scene of the occurrence apart from footprint of the accused. In the FSL report Exhibit P - 48, footprints matched. The FSL report Exhibit P - 49 shows that buttons and thread recovered from the scene of occurrence were matching to the buttons and thread of clothes recovered at the instance of the accused. The said witness has further shown that even the accused was having an injury on his cheek, which can come if the deceased tried to struggle. The injury report of the accused Exhibit P - 30 was also proved by the witness.
It is stated that in the investigation, ornaments of the deceased were found missing from the person of deceased and the same were recovered at the instance of the accused. He opened the box after getting the key earlier seized by the police at the time of arrest. The recovery of mobile phone, below seat cover of the cycle, was also at the instance of the accused. The recovery of mobile of the deceased from the box has again shown to be a connecting evidence.
The prosecution produced witnesses of recovery apart from PW - 17 Dr.Vishv Deepak to prove the postmortem report. PW - 17 Dr.Vishv Deepak has stated about injuries on the person of deceased and even the cause of death. The postmortem report (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:57 PM) (8 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014] is Exhibit P - 15. The deceased has received simple injuries but the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of throttling sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. The injury No.1 is a bruise on the mid front neck at the level just below thyroid cartilage. The injury No.2 is again bruise on the mid front neck at the level of thyroid cartilage just right to the midline. The death was out of throttling and injuries on the neck have proved it.
The statement of PW - 6 Dr.Surendra Meena is also relevant. He has given description of the injuries to the accused. The accused had received two injuries near the cheek. The aforesaid is relevant in reference to the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He said to have given beating by the police but it is not corroborated in the statement of PW - 6 Dr.Surendra Meena. His injury report is Exhibit P - 30.
PW - 2 Vishnu Sarraf has proved recovery of ornaments as well as mobile of the accused and thereby, proved Exhibit P - 12 and Exhibit P - 17 for the aforesaid. The recovery of shoes of the accused has also been proved by the said witness. He has also proved Exhibit P - 13, i.e., seizure and recovery memo of clothes of the accused.
The prosecution even produced call details as well as location of mobile of the accused as well as the deceased. The call details were obtained from their system and produced in evidence. It was proved that last call to the deceased was of accused and even location of the accused was at the place of occurrence.
In view of the above, the prosecution could bring chain of evidence to connect the accused-appellant with the crime. The accused-appellant and deceased were on telephone at around (Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:58 PM) (9 of 9) [CRLA-412/2014] 7.00 PM on the day of occurrence and thereupon, the deceased left the house. The dead body of the deceased was found in a "nala" near open University. The location of the accused-appellant was also found at the place of occurrence at around 7.36 PM on the day of occurrence. The ornaments of the deceased were recovered at the instance of the accused apart from her mobile phone. The police had taken footprint from the place of occurrence and also the footprint of the accused. It was sent for the FSL vide Exhibit P - 48. The footprint of the accused are matching to the footprints at the place of occurrence. The FSL report Exhibit P - 49 has shown that buttons recovered from the place of occurrence were of shirt of the accused and recovered at his instance.
In view of the above, the prosecution has proved its case beyond doubt by bringing complete chain of evidence.
Accordingly, we do not find any ground to cause interference in the order of the trial Court, hence, the appeal is dismissed. The record be sent back to the trial Court.
(BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J (M.N. BHANDARI),J
Preeti
(Downloaded on 05/06/2021 at 10:16:58 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)