Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vinod @ Binu vs State on 12 November, 2018
Bench: Pradeep Nandrajog, Manoj Kumar Garg
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
(1) D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 518/2008
Kiran Kumar @ Kirni And Anr.
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
Connected With
(2) D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 98/2018
Vinod @ Binu
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Gill
Mr. S.P. Joshi, Amicus Curiae
For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.P. S. Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment 12/11/2018
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Trial court record has been perused.
2. Criminal law was set into motion when Jasveer Bai (neutral gender person) P.W.-2 went to Police Station Hanumangarh at 9.15 a.m. on 13.10.2015 and made a statement that she resides at Band Gali Choawk DPGC Hanumangarh Town. Vimala Bai (neutral gender person) aged 65 years used to reside opposite to her house. She was alcoholic. She would drink alcohol till late night. As per her habit, last night she drunk alcohol till around (2 of 5) [CRLA-518/2008] 11.00 p.m. and created a raucous. She counselled her to go inside, close the door and sleep. As per her habit she got up at 6 a.m. the next day morning and after taking tea noticed that Vimala Bai had not awoken. On 13.10.2005 Vimala was not seen by her till 7.00 a.m. She asked Nathi Bai, a neighbour, as to why Vimala Bai did not get up. Both of them approached the door of the house of Vimala Bai. The door was slightly open. They saw Vimala Bai lying dead; smearing in blood. She apprehended that in the night some criminals entered the house of Vimala Bai to commit theft and murdered her.
3. Based on the statement FIR Exhibit-1 was recorded. Bhanwar Singh Rathore (P.W.-16) of the police station took over the investigation and reached the scene of the crime. He summoned the crime team. Photographs were taken. Dead body of the deceased was seized and sent to the mortuary for post- mortem. Rough site plan was drawn.
4. Dr. Jaspal Badpagga (P.W.-13) conducted the post-mortem of the deceased and prepared the post-mortem report Exhibit-45. Seven injuries were noted on the body of the deceased. There were bruises and lacerated injuries. The cause of death is haemorrhagic shock due to excessive bleeding.
5. It was a blind murder. No clues regarding the identity of the perpetrator or perpetrators of the crime could be detected by the Investigating Officer. There was no suspect.
6. An anonymous letter Exhibit-47 was received at the police station on 01.05.2006. Three persons i.e. the appellants named Kiran Kumar, Lali @ Anil Kumar and Vinod @ Vinu were disclosed in the letter as accused. Vinod and Kiran Kumar were apprehended on 04.05.2006. Lali was apprehended on (3 of 5) [CRLA-518/2008] 05.05.2006. Pursuant to the disclosure statement made by the three as recorded in the seizure memo Exhibit-P28, at the instance of Kiran Kumar, utensils made of steel on which name of the deceased was inscribed were recovered. A pant and shirt stated by him to be worn when the crime was committed was seized vide seizure memo Exhibit-P29. Similarly, steel utensils on which name of the deceased was inscribed was recovered at the instance of Vinod as per seizure memo Exhibit-P30. Clothes worn by him i.e. pant and shirt statedly at the time of crime were seized vide seizure memo Exhibit-P31. Likewise, steel utensils at the instance and pursuant to the disclosure statement of Lali were seized vide seizure memo Exhibit-P39. Pant and shirt worn by him statedly at the time of crime was seized vide seizure memo Exhibit-P40.
7. FSL report Exhibit-P57 opines that the blood group of the deceased was 'B' and blood of same group was detected on the clothes statedly recovered pursuant to the disclosure statements made by the three accused.
8. Armed with the aforesaid material and citing Gurudev Singh (P.W.-10) and Prem Kumar (P.W.-12) as the witnesses to the recovery the three accused were sent for trial.
9. The only incriminating evidence to link the accused to the crime is obviously the recovery of the steel utensils on which the name of the deceased was inscribed plus the clothes which the three accused were statedly wearing at the time of the crime which were statedly recovered at the instance of the accused on which human blood of the same group as that of the deceased was detected.
(4 of 5) [CRLA-518/2008]
10. At the trial P.W.-10 and P.W.-12 have turned hostile. They have not supported the case of the prosecution regarding the recoveries.
11. It assumes importance to note that the crime took place on the intervening night of the 12th October, 2005 and 13th October, 2005. Three accused were apprehended on 4 th and 5th May, 2006. The recoveries have been effected on the next day.
12. It is settled law that recoveries of ordinary articles and that too after a long time elapsing between the commission of the crime and the recovery is no doubt incriminating evidence but of a very weak nature. Similarly, recovery of blood stained clothes after a long period of time would also be of the same week incriminating nature. In a case of circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances have to be shown complete to point towards guilt of the accused and to rule out the innocence.
13. The fact that ordinary utensils of steel were purportedly recovered after more than eight months of the crime and keeping in view the panch witnesses having turned hostile it would be unsafe to accept the prosecution version that the steel utensils on which the name of the deceased was inscribed is at the instance of the accused. We disbelieve the evidence of recovery.
14. Similar would be the position regarding the blood stained clothes. It is difficult to believe that after 7 months the blood on the clothes would not have putrefied.
15. Learned Court of Sessions has returned a verdict of guilt only on two circumstances proved against the accused. Since we have disbelieved the recoveries and even assuming the recoveries were made of ordinary articles and blood stained clothes, the same fall (5 of 5) [CRLA-518/2008] short of the standard proof required in the case of circumstantial evidence.
16. The appeals are allowed. Impugned judgment dated 08.05.2008 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of the charge framed against them for murdering the deceased and committing robbery in the house of the deceased.
17. Since the appellants are in custody they are directed to be released forthwith unless required to be in custody in some other case.
18. However, keeping in view the provisions of Section 437A Cr.P.C. the accused appellants are directed to furnish personal bonds in sum of ₹15,000/- and a surety bond in the like amount each, before the learned trial court, which shall be effective for a period of six months to the effect that in the event of filing of a Special Leave Petition against the present judgment on receipt of notice thereof, the appellants shall appear before the Supreme Court.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ Mohit Tak Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)