Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Rajasthan vs Ramkesh on 17 August, 2017
Bench: N.V. Ramana, Prafulla C. Pant
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1328-1329 of 2010
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Appellant
Versus
RAMKESH AND ORS. ETC. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 07.09.2007, passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur, in DBCRA No. 81 of 2002 and 618 of 2005, whereby the High Court allowed the appeals of some of the accused (seventeen in number), and dismissed the appeals of twelve other accused.
The brief facts of the case, as per prosecution, are that there was a dispute over a small piece of land between two groups and there were as many as 33 persons involved in the commission of triple murder, out of which 29 were put to trial before the trial court. The trial court, vide order dated 10.01.2002, convicted and sentenced 28 assailants (including Respondents herein) u/s. 148/302/149/326/325/324/323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
On an appeal, the High Court, after considering the evidence, acquitted 17 persons and affirmed the conviction of 12 accused persons. Aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, appellant Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SHASHI SAREEN Date: 2017.08.24 State has filed these appeals against acquitted accused-respondents 16:13:05 IST Reason:
herein.2
We have gone through the evidence of the witnesses and the judgments of the courts below. We find that the High Court has given valid reasons upon noticing exaggerations, inconsistencies and embellishments in the testimony of witnesses and in our opinion, the High Court has rightly acquitted the accused persons–respondents herein. It is to be noted that the incident occurred at 8:45 AM on July 10, 2000, whereas the report was handed over to SHO at the hospital on July 11, 2000. Further the complainant states that he got the complaint typed from a typist in front of the hospital which the High Court has rightly disbelieved. Moreover, in facts and circumstances, it is very difficult to believe the highly precise graphic description of the incident as provided in the complaint which raises a reasonable doubt. Also the possibility of over implication cannot be ruled out in this case. Thus, the High Court has rightly come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish guilt of the seventeen accused beyond reasonable doubt.
We, therefore, do not think that the present case needs interference by this Court.
The criminal appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.
.................J. (N.V. RAMANA) .................J. (PRAFULLA C. PANT) New Delhi, August 17, 2017.3
ITEM NO.108 COURT NO.10 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 1328-1329/2010
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN Appellant(s)
VERSUS
RAMKESH & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 17-08-2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT For Appellant(s) Ms. Harsha Vinoy, Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Altaf Hussain, Adv.
Mr. R. C. Kaushik, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SHASHI SAREEN) (S. SIVARAMAKRISHNA)
AR CUM PS ASST.REGISTRAR
(Signed order is placed on the file)