State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Sanjeev Dhawan @ Monu Dhawan And Anr.

This acquittal appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State against the judgment dated 19.8.2013 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, District-Durg, (C.G.), in S.T. No. 86/2012 by which respondents herein has been acquitted of the charges punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC.

¶20

Brief facts of the case, is that, the deceased Rajkumari Maggo, who was the grandmother of the accused Sanjeev Dhawan, was the head of the household and resided in her house situated at Mohan Nagar along with the other deceased persons, namely her son Ravi Maggo, her granddaughter Kumari Reema Maggo, and her grandson/ alleged deceased Deepak. The deceased Rajkumari had great affection for the accused Sanjeev Dhawan, who is the son of her daughter Kanchan, and owing to such affection, the accused frequently visited her from his village and spent time conversing with her. During the course of such interactions, the accused allegedly misled the deceased by weaving deceptive stories and induced her to part with a substantial amount of money on the pretext of establishing a source of employment. Believing the assurances given by the accused and trusting him as her grandson, the deceased Rajkumari agreed to his request and, in order to financially assist him, mortgaged/sold her plot and advanced a sum of

¶21

3

¶22

approximately Rs. 18 lakhs to the accused Sanjeev Dhawan as a loan for the purpose of setting up a plant. It is alleged that with the said amount, the accused established a water pouch manufacturing factory and, in the initial stages, in order to maintain the confidence of the deceased and avoid any suspicion, he used to remit certain amounts into her bank account in the form of installments. However, subsequently, either due to a change in his financial circumstances, alleged losses incurred in the factory, or due to a dishonest intention developing on his part, the accused stopped sending any further payments and began contemplating ways to evade repayment of the loan amount. Meanwhile, the deceased Rajkumari had fixed the marriage of her granddaughter, the deceased Kumari Reema Maggo, and on account of the impending marriage she was in urgent need of money, due to which she repeatedly demanded that the accused Sanjeev Dhawan return the amount advanced to him. The accused, however, continued to avoid repayment by making various excuses. According to the prosecution, the accused apprehended that the deceased Rajkumari would continue to exert pressure upon him for the return of the money and that such persistent demands might ultimately expose the truth. With the intention of preventing the matter from coming to light and freeing himself from the liability of repayment, the accused allegedly conceived a plan to eliminate his grandmother. In furtherance of this plan, the accused Sanjeev Dhawan is stated to have involved

¶23

4

¶24

his associate Ranjit Paswan in the conspiracy and persuaded him to assist in carrying out the act, and prior to the date of the incident, both of them allegedly proceeded from Dhanbad, Jharkhand, towards Durg with the intention of executing their plan. Before reaching Durg, the accused Sanjeev Dhawan telephonically contacted the deceased Kumari Reema Maggo and informed her that he would be arriving late at night, requesting her to keep the door open for him. It is alleged that the accused had brought with him a large quantity of sleeping pills which he mixed in a sliced edible substance or drink and, upon reaching the house, represented the same to the family members as prasad , thereby inducing them to consume it. After consuming the said mixture, all the family members fell asleep, however, none of them died. Soon after drinking the mixture, Deepak vomited, which aroused suspicion in the mind of the accused that the presence of an intoxicating or poisonous substance in the drink might be discovered. Consequently, on the date of the incident, i.e., 02.09.2011 at about 6:30 a.m., the accused sent his cousin Deepak Maggo to a nearby shop and thereafter, in his absence, both the accused persons jointly committed the murder of Rajkumari Maggo, Kumari Reema Maggo and Ravi Maggo by slitting their throats one by one with a knife. After committing the murders, co-accused Ranjeet Paswan broke the lock of the back door with a pair of scissors and threw the same into a water tank in order to conceal the evidence. Thereafter, both the accused

¶25

5

¶26

wrapped the blood-stained mattress covers and pillow covers, along with the knife used in the commission of the offence, and disposed of them by throwing them into a drain situated near the Gurudwara. Subsequently, both the accused proceeded towards Rajendra Chowk where they waited for a bus and from there telephonically called Deepak Maggo and summoned him. Thereafter, accused Sanjeev Dhawan sent Deepak Maggo to Raipur on a motorcycle along with Ranjeet Paswan while he himself travelled to Raipur by bus, and from there all three proceeded towards Sambalpur. However, before reaching their destination they alighted from the bus and travelled by autorickshaw to the Samlai Temple where they sat near a canal located behind the temple. At that point, Sanjeev Dhawan received a phone call from his brother and during the course of the conversation Deepak Maggo became suspicious, whereupon he was allegedly pushed into the canal and his body was carried away by the flowing water. Meanwhile, Dharam Singh (PW-1), who was residing in the house of the deceased as a tenant, woke up at about 7:00 a.m. on the morning of the incident for his daily routine and went to use the bathroom, where he noticed that Kumari Reema Maggo was lying covered with a sheet and appeared to be sleeping while no other member of the family was visible. Dharam Singh and his mother regularly used the bathroom belonging to their landlord, the deceased Ravi Maggo. After about fifteen to twenty minutes he left for his work and returned around

¶27

6

¶28

2:00 p.m., when he again opened the lock of the channel gate and went to wash his hands and face in the bathroom, at which time he observed that the back door of the house was open. At that moment a girl named Soni, also known as Chandni (PW-4), who lived nearby, arrived and informed him that as no one was present in the house of Ravi Maggo the milkman had left their milk there, whereupon she entered the kitchen and began heating the milk. After closing the back door, both of them locked the channel gate and left the premises. Later in the evening at about 8:00–8:30 p.m., when Dharam Singh returned from work, it was noticed that none of the members of Ravi Maggo’s family had been seen throughout the day. The channel gate outside was locked, whereas none of the internal doors were locked. Thereafter, Chandni alias Soni (PW-4), Dharam Singh (PW-1) and his mother Baljit entered the house after opening the channel gate lock. During this time Chandni removed the curtain from the window and noticed a person’s leg lying on the bed, which raised suspicion. Consequently, neighbours were gathered and Dharam Singh informed the police. On the basis of this information, the incharge of Mohannagar Police Outpost, Aditya Sharma (PW-15), recorded the First Information Report at 21:30 hours as Exhibit P-1 and registered Crime No. 491/2011 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, initially expressing suspicion against Deepak Maggo. On the same night, merg numbers 34, 35 and 36 were also registered and an inquiry into the cause of death was initiated

¶29

7

¶30

under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. During the investigation, witnesses were summoned and the bodies were identified, and upon inspection of the scene of occurrence it was found that the house of Ravi Maggo, situated about 100 metres behind the Gurudwara in Durg city, contained three rooms occupied by the family, while Dharam Singh resided as a tenant in the first room. In one room the body of Rajkumari was found lying on a double bed with a blood-stained bedsheet and a visible injury mark on the neck, while an iron almirah was found open with clothes scattered and three jewellery boxes lying empty. In another room the body of Kumari Reema was found lying on a wooden sofa with blood stains and a similar injury mark on the neck, while the almirah in that room remained untouched and the kitchen nearby contained used tea leaves after straining tea. In a third room the body of Ravi Maggo was found lying on a double bed with blood-stained bedding and a similar injury mark on the neck, and the room contained a sofa set, two centre tables, a dining table with five chairs and a television on a stand. Significantly, no signs of struggle were found in any of the rooms. During the inquest proceedings the investigating officer seized a glass containing a small quantity of tea from the centre table in Ravi Maggo’s room as per seizure memo Exhibit P-26, and also seized the tea-making bowl, strainer and used tea leaves from the kitchen platform as per Exhibit P-27. Considering the circumstances, the three bodies were sent to the District Hospital,

¶31

8

¶32

Durg for post-mortem examination, where Dr. Yashwantrao Dumde (PW-10) opined that the throats of the deceased had been cut with a sharp-edged weapon and that death had occurred due to shock resulting from excessive bleeding caused by the cutting of the windpipe and major blood vessels. The post-mortem examination conducted on 03.09.2011 between 2:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. indicated that the deaths had occurred within the preceding 24 to 36 hours and were homicidal in nature. During further investigation statements of various witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the basis of the memorandum statement of accused Sanjeev Dhawan a steel knife measuring approximately six inches in length, bearing blood stains and sharp on one side, was recovered as per seizure memo Exhibit P-11, while a large pair of scissors concealed in the water tank was recovered at the instance of co-accused Ranjeet Paswan as per Exhibit P-12, after which both accused were arrested. The accused further disclosed that the mattress and pillow covers along with a knife had been thrown into a drain, and although the drain was searched on 17.12.2011 nothing could be recovered due to excessive mud and filth and a panchnama was prepared accordingly. During further investigation, statements of witnesses from Jharkhand and other places were recorded, a Videocon mobile phone was seized from Madhu alias Madha which had been obtained from a person named Kargil who claimed to have found it near a river bank, and

¶33

9

¶34

site maps of relevant places including the canal near Sambalpur where Deepak had allegedly been drowned were prepared. On 19.12.2011, the accused Sanjeev Dhawan produced from his house at village Lodna, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand, an SBI passbook in the names of the deceased Rajkumari and Ravi Kumar along with other documents including a post office passbook, an ICICI Bank ATM card, PAN cards, a rexine purse and a Nokia mobile handset, all of which were seized. The seized articles including the steel knife, tea remnants, tea leaves, clothes and bedsheets of the deceased and their viscera were sent for chemical examination, which revealed the presence of blood on the clothes but no chemical poison in the tea remnants, tea leaves or viscera.

¶35

Upon completion of the investigation and finding sufficient evidence indicating that the accused persons had jointly committed the murders of Ravi Maggo, Rajkumari Maggo, Kumari Reema Maggo and Deepak Maggo, a final report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed against them for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durg on 05.03.2012, and after committal the matter came before this Court for trial.

¶36

So as to hold the accused/respondents guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 19 witnesses and exhibited 76 documents.

¶37

10

¶38

The statement of the accused persons/respondents was also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which they denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.

¶39

After appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned trial Court found that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and by the impugned judgment dated 19.8.2013, acquitted the accused persons/respondents from the aforesaid charges. Hence, this appeal.

¶40

Learned counsel for the appellant/State submits that the learned trial Court has committed a grave error of law in acquitting the accused persons/respondents of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, despite the existence of overwhelming incriminating evidence on record. It is contended that the trial Court failed to properly appreciate and evaluate the material evidence as well as the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that the accused/respondent No. 1 was found using a mobile phone which earlier belonged to the deceased Rajkumari Maggo and the said mobile phone was duly seized from his possession during the course of investigation. The present case pertains to the brutal murder of three persons, namely Rajkumari Maggo, Ku. Rima Maggo and Ravi Maggo, while another person, Deepak Maggo, remains untraced to this day. Considering the gravity and

¶41

11

¶42

seriousness of the offence, wherein three members of the same family were murdered and one person is still missing, the evidence on record clearly establishes strong circumstances against the accused persons. It is also submitted that the bank passbook of deceased Rajkumari Maggo, the postal passbook of deceased Ravi Maggo, along with the ATM card, PAN card and other documents belonging to the deceased were recovered from the possession of respondent No. 1, which further connects him with the commission of the offence. The prosecution case further indicates that the accused/respondent No. 1 had borrowed a substantial amount of money from deceased Rajkumari Maggo and when she demanded repayment, the accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, committed the murder of the said three persons. It is therefore contended that in view of the seriousness of the offence and the strong circumstantial evidence appearing against the accused persons, the learned trial Court ought to have convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the acquittal recorded by the trial Court is based on improper appreciation of evidence, as the material evidence produced by the prosecution has been overlooked, resulting in an erroneous judgment. Hence, it is prayed that the present appeal be allowed.

¶43

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is hardly any cogent or reliable evidence available on record to warrant the conviction of the respondents. It is

¶44

12

¶45

contended that the entire prosecution case rests solely on circumstantial evidence; however, the alleged circumstances have not been duly proved or established against the respondents so as to form a complete and unbroken chain pointing towards their guilt. Learned counsel further submits that neither the memorandum statements nor the alleged seizures, including the details of the mobile call records, have been satisfactorily proved by the prosecution in accordance with law. It is also submitted that the respondents are residents of Dhanbad in the State of Jharkhand and the prosecution has utterly failed to establish any convincing motive or link the respondents with the commission of the alleged crime. According to the respondents, the prosecution has failed to establish the complete chain of circumstances necessary for sustaining a conviction based on circumstantial evidence. It is further argued that the learned trial Court, after thoroughly considering each and every aspect of the matter, has rightly acquitted the respondents. In fact, the trial Court, in paragraph No. 95 of the impugned judgment, has specifically observed that the prosecution as well as the investigating agency failed to collect proper and reliable evidence in the present case. It is also pointed out that the alleged seizure of the knife was made after a lapse of three months, despite the fact that the police had searched the house of accused/respondent No. 1 on several occasions earlier but failed to recover the said weapon. Even the assistance of a sniffer dog was taken during investigation, yet no

¶46

13

¶47

conclusive material could be gathered. The entire investigation conducted by the prosecution is stated to be defective and unreliable. Moreover, one of the persons, namely Deepak Maggo, is still untraceable, and the prosecution has made no serious effort to locate him or to produce any concrete evidence to establish whether he is alive or dead. In such circumstances, it is submitted that the prosecution has failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances necessary to prove the guilt of the respondents beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the learned trial Court has not committed any error of law in acquitting the accused persons/respondents, and the impugned judgment does not call for any interference.

¶48

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶49

The Supreme Court has considered the scope of interference in cases of acquittal in several matters and has passed several guidelines for considering the appeals arising out of acquittal of accused persons in the matter of Jafarudheen and others vs. State of Kerala¹ has considered the scope of interference in Appeal against acquittal, which reads as under:-

¶50

“25. While dealing with an appeal against acquittal by invoking Section 378 CrPC, the appellate court has to consider whether the trial court's view can be terms as a possible

¶51

1 (2022) 8 SCC 440

¶52

14

¶53

one, particularly when evidence on record has been analysed. The reason is that an order of acquittal adds up to the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused. Thus, the appellate court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the trial court rendering acquittal. Therefore, the presumption in favour of the accused does not get weakened but only strengthened. Such a double presumption that enures in favour of the accused has to be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters.”

¶54

In the matter of Kali Ram vs State of H.P.² , the Supreme Court has held in para 25 which reads as under:-

¶55

“25.Another golden thread which runs through the web of the administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favorable to the accused should be adopted. This principle has a special relevance in cases where the guilt of the accused is sought to be established by circumstantial evidence.”

¶56

The Hon'ble Apex Court vide its judgment dated 12.02.2024 (Criminal Appeal No 1162 of 2011) passed in Mallappa and Ors. Versus State of Karnataka has held in para 36 as under:-

¶57

2 (1973) 2 SCC 808

¶58

15

¶59

"36. Our criminal jurisprudence is essentially based on the promise that no innocent shall be condemned as guilty. All the safeguards and the jurisprudential values of criminal law, are intended to prevent any failure of justice. The principles which come into play while deciding an appeal from acquittal could be summarized as:-

¶60

(i) Appreciation of evidence is the core element of a criminal trial and such appreciation must be comprehensive-inclusive of all evidence, oral and documentary;

¶61

(ii) Partial or selective appreciation of evidence may result in a miscarriage of justice and is in itself a ground of challenge;

¶62

(iii) If the Court, after appreciation of evidence, finds that two views are possible, the one in favour of the accused shall ordinarily be followed;

¶63

(iv) If the view of the Trial Court is a legally plausible view, mere possibility of a contrary view shall not justify the reversal of acquittal;

¶64

(v) If the appellate Court is inclined to reverse the acquittal in appeal on a re-appreciation of evidence, it must specifically address all the reasons given by the Trial Court for acquittal and must cover all the facts;

¶65

(vi) In a case of reversal from acquittal to conviction, the appellate Court must demonstrate an illegality, perversity or error of law or fact in the decision of the Trial Court.

¶66

16

¶67

Further, the Supreme Court in the matter of Surendra Singh and

¶68

another v. State of Uttarakhand³ , whereby in Para-11 & 12, it has been held that the High Court should interfere in the order of acquittal, if the same suffers from perversity and is based on misreading of material evidence etc. and observed as under:

¶69

“ 11. Recently, in the case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and others v. State of Karnataka , (2024) 8 SCC 149, a Bench of this Court to which one of us was a Member (B.R. Gavai, J.) had an occasion to consider the legal position with regard to the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal. It was observed thus:

¶70

“38. First of all, we would like to reiterate the principles laid down by this Court governing the scope of interference by the High Court in an appeal filed by the State for challenging acquittal of the accused recorded by the trial court.

¶71

39. This Court in Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar [Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar, (2022) 3 SCC 471 : (2022) 2 SCC (Cri) 31] encapsulated the legal position covering the field after considering various earlier judgments and held as below : (SCC pp. 48283, para 29) 6 (2024) 8 SCC 149

¶72

“29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words : (Chandrappa case [Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4

¶73

3 2025 5 SCC 433

¶74

17

¶75

SCC 415 : (2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 325], SCC p. 432, para 42

¶76

42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:

¶77

(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.

¶78

(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.

¶79

(3) Various expressions, such as, “substantial and compelling reasons”, “good and sufficient grounds”, “very strong circumstances”, “distorted conclusions”, “glaring mistakes”, etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of “flourishes of language” to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.

¶80

(4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly,

¶81

18

¶82

the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.

¶83

(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.’ ”

¶84

40. Further, in H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka [H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581: (2023) 3 SCC (Cri) 748], this Court summarised the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378CrPC as follows :(SCC p. 584, para 8)

¶85

“8. … 8.1. The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;

¶86

8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;

¶87

8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;

¶88

19

¶89

8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and

¶90

8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible.”

¶91

41. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:

¶92

41.1. That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;

¶93

41.2. That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and

¶94

41.3. That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.”

¶95

12. It could thus be seen that it is a settled legal position that the interference with the finding of acquittal recorded by the learned trial judge would be warranted by the High Court only if the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; that the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and that no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent

¶96

20

¶97

with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.”

¶98

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Tulasareddi @ Mudakappa and another vs. The State of Karnataka & others, 2026 SCC Online SC 89, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as under:-

¶99

“27. In the case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar v. State of Karnataka, 2024 (8) SCC 149 this Court held in paragraphs 39 to 42 as under:

¶100

39. This Court in Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar [Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar, (2022) 3 SCC 471 : (2022) 2 SCC (Cri) 31] encapsulated the legal position covering the field after considering various earlier judgments and held as below: (SCC pp.482-83, para 29)

¶101

“ 29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words: (Chandrappacase [Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415 : (2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 325], SCC p. 432, para 42)

¶102

‘ 42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the

¶103

21

¶104

appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:

¶105

(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.

¶106

(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.

¶107

(3) Various expressions, such as, “substantial and compelling reasons”, “good and sufficient grounds”, “very strong circumstances”, “distorted conclusions”, “glaring mistakes”, etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of “flourishes of language” to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.

¶108

(4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of

¶109

22

¶110

innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.

¶111

(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.’

¶112

40. Further, in H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka [H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581 : (2023) 3 SCC (Cri) 748] this Court summarised the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 CrPC as follows : (SCC p. 584, para 8)

¶113

“ 8. … 8.1. The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;

¶114

8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;

¶115

8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required to consider

¶116

23

¶117

whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;

¶118

8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and

¶119

8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible.”

¶120

41. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:

¶121

41.1. That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;

¶122

41.2. That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and

¶123

41.3. That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.

¶124

42. The appellate court, in order to interfere with the judgment of acquittal would have to record pertinent findings on the above factors if it is inclined to reverse the judgment of acquittal rendered by the

¶125

24

¶126

trial court.

¶127

28. In the case of Ramesh v. State of Uttarakhand, 2020 (20) SCC 522, this Court has observed and held in para 19 & 20 as under:

¶128

“19. In a case like this when the trial court acquitted the accused persons of their charges, the High Court could not have reversed the finding merely on the basis that other view, as recorded by the High Court, appeared to it to be a plausible view. Such an approach by the High Court, against the judgment of the acquittal, is impermissible. In this context, we may usefully refer to Kalyan v. State of U.P. [Kalyan v. State of U.P., (2001) 9 SCC 632 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 780] wherein it was held : (SCC pp. 640-41, paras 15, 18 & 20)

¶129

“15. … The view taken by the trial court could have been disturbed only if there were compelling reasons. We do not find any compelling reason noticed [State of U.P. v. Hari Lal, 1998 SCC OnLine All 1216 : 1999 All LJ 142] by the High Court while setting aside the order of acquittal.

¶130

18. Even if another view regarding the occurrence was possible, as taken by the High Court, the same could not be made a basis for setting aside the order of the trial court in view of the settled

¶131

25

¶132

position of law on the point.

¶133

20. Under the circumstances, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the judgment of the High Court convicting the accused persons and sentencing them to various imprisonments including life imprisonment. We uphold the order of acquittal passed by the trial court in favour of the appellants.”

¶134

20. In another judgment in Basappa v. State of Karnataka [Basappa v. State of Karnataka, (2014) 5 SCC 154 : (2014) 2 SCC (Cri) 497], this Court noticed plethora of judgments where this very principle had been adopted, as can be seen from the following discussion therefrom : (SCC pp. 158-61, paras 11-12, 14 &; 17-18)

¶135

“11. In Bhim Singh v. State of Haryana [Bhim Singh v. State of Haryana, (2002) 10 SCC 461 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 1469], it has been clarified that interference by the appellate court against an order of acquittal would be justified only if the view taken by the trial court is one which no reasonable person would in the given circumstances, take.

¶136

12. In Kallu v. State of M.P. [Kallu v. State of M.P., (2006) 10 SCC 313 : (2006) 3 SCC (Cri) 546], it has been held by this Court that if the view taken by the trial court is a plausible view, the High Court will not be justified in reversing it merely because a different view is possible….

¶137

26

¶138

14. In Ganpat v. State of Haryana [Ganpat v. State of Haryana, (2010) 12 SCC 59 :(2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 309], SCC para 15, some of the above principles have been restated. To quote : (SCC p. 62)

¶139

‘15. The following principles have to be kept in mind by the appellate court while dealing with appeals, particularly, against an order of acquittal:

¶140

(iv) An order of acquittal is to be interfered with only when there are “compelling and substantial reasons” for doing so. If the order is “clearly unreasonable”, it is a compelling reason for interference.’

¶141

17. … It is not the stand of the High Court that there had been some miscarriage of justice in the way the trial court has appreciated the evidence. On the contrary, it is the only stand of the High Court that on the available evidence, another view is also reasonably possible in the sense that the appellantaccused could have been convicted. In such circumstances, the High Court was not justified in reversing the acquittal….

¶142

18. The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment [State of Karnataka v. Basappa, 2010 SCC OnLine Kar 5110] is set aside and that of the trial court is restored.”

¶143

Upon perusal of the record, it appears that the present case relates to the alleged murder of three persons and the disappearance of another person, who is also suspected to have

¶144

27

¶145

died. The entire prosecution case rests solely on circumstantial evidence; however, the prosecution has failed to satisfactorily prove the essential circumstances forming the basis of its case. Neither the memorandum statements nor the alleged seizures, nor even the motive attributed to the accused persons/respondents for committing the alleged crime, have been duly proved in accordance with law. The prosecution has thus utterly failed to establish the chain of circumstances necessary to bring home the guilt of the accused persons/respondents. It further appears from the record that the First Information Report was initially lodged against one Deepak Maggo, who is still untraceable; however, the charge-sheet was subsequently filed against the present accused persons/respondents. The prosecution has alleged, on the basis of the memorandum statements of the accused persons/respondents, that a sum of Rs. 18 lakhs had been given by the deceased Rajkumari Maggo to the accused; however, the said allegation has not been substantiated by any reliable evidence. It thus appears that the accused persons/respondents have been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion. None of the prosecution witnesses have supported the vital aspects of the prosecution case and, in the absence of any cogent evidence, it appears that the accused persons/respondents were charge-sheeted without proper material on record. It is for this reason that the learned trial Court has also observed in its judgment that the investigation conducted

¶146

28

¶147

by the prosecution was faulty and deficient. The trial Court has further recorded that due to serious lapses on the part of the investigating agency, no reliable evidence could be brought on record. In a case involving such a heinous and barbaric incident of the alleged murder of three persons and the disappearance of another, the investigation carried out by the concerned police was so defective that it left no scope for sustaining the conviction of the accused persons/respondents.

¶148

Upon careful examination of the record and appreciation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses, this Court is of the considered opinion that although the allegations pertain to a grave and serious offence, the conviction of the accused persons/respondents cannot be sustained in the absence of sufficient and reliable evidence. It appears that the prosecution has failed to conduct the investigation in a proper and effective manner, and such lapses in the investigation have resulted in the failure to establish the guilt of the accused persons/respondents beyond reasonable doubt. The deficiencies and shortcomings in the investigation have significantly weakened the prosecution case, thereby creating serious doubts regarding the involvement of the accused persons/respondents in the alleged crime. In so far as the reversal of an order of acquittal is concerned, it is well settled that unless there exists overwhelming and cogent evidence against the accused persons/respondents which has been ignored or improperly appreciated by the trial Court,

¶149

29

¶150

resulting in a miscarriage of justice, the judgment of acquittal should not ordinarily be interfered with. In the present case, no such compelling circumstances are made out so as to warrant interference with the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court.

¶151

It is a well-settled principle of law, consistently reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, that where the trial Court, upon proper appreciation of the evidence on record, has passed a judgment of acquittal, such a finding cannot be interfered with or reversed in a routine or casual manner by the appellate Court. Interference with an order of acquittal is warranted only when it is demonstrated that the trial Court has committed a manifest error of law or has ignored material evidence on record, resulting in a perverse or wholly unreasonable finding leading to a miscarriage of justice. Unless there exist glaring mistakes, patent illegality, or serious infirmities in the reasoning adopted by the trial Court, the judgment of acquittal ordinarily deserves due deference and should not be disturbed.

¶152

Considering the totality of the evidence available on record and in light of the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is evident that the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused persons/respondents. The trial Court, after due appreciation of the material placed before it, has categorically recorded that no cogent or reliable evidence has emerged against

¶153

30

¶154

the accused persons/respondents to establish their involvement in the alleged offence. The circumstances sought to be relied upon by the prosecution have not been duly proved, nor do they form a complete and unbroken chain pointing towards the guilt of the accused persons/respondents. In the absence of such proof, the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, no conviction can legally be sustained against the accused persons/respondents.

¶155

This Court finds no illegality in the order impugned acquitting the respondents particularly when there is a settled legal position that if two views are possible, the appellate Court should not interfere with the judgment of acquittal, even otherwise, the prosecution thus has utterly failed in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court has fully justified in recording the finding of acquittal which is based on proper appreciation of evidence available on record.

¶156

In such facts and evidence, the trial court has, thus, not committed any illegality in acquitting the respondents for the commission of the alleged crime.

¶157

However, as observed in the preceding paragraphs, it is evident that owing to a defective and improper investigation, the prosecution was unable to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, despite the grave nature of the incident involving the murder of three persons and the suspicious

¶158

31

¶159

disappearance of another individual, who also appears to have been murdered, the accused persons stand acquitted. This Court is of the considered view that the investigating agency, which forms the backbone of the prosecution, is duty-bound to conduct a fair, thorough, and lawful investigation in every case. If, on account of a tainted or negligent investigation, the accused persons are acquitted, the responsibility ought to be squarely fixed upon the concerned investigating agency, as such lapses not only defeat the cause of justice but also erode public confidence in the criminal justice system.

¶160

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Gujarat vs. Kishanbhai and others, (2014) 5 SCC 108 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as under:-

¶161

“ 22 . Every acquittal should be understood as a failure of

¶162

the justice delivery system, in serving the cause of justice. Likewise, every acquittal should ordinarily lead to the inference, that an innocent person was wrongfully prosecuted. It is therefore essential that every State should put in place a procedural mechanism which would ensure that the cause of justice is served, which would simultaneously ensure the safeguard of interest of those who are innocent. In furtherance of the above purpose, it is considered essential to direct the Home Department of every State to examine all orders of acquittal and to

¶163

32

¶164

record reasons for the failure of each prosecution case. A Standing Committee of senior officers of the police and prosecution departments should be vested with the aforesaid responsibility. The consideration at the hands of the above Committee, should be utilised for crystallising mistakes committed during investigation, and/or prosecution, or both. The Home Department of every State Government will incorporate in its existing training programmes for junior investigation/prosecution officials course-content drawn from the above consideration. The same should also constitute coursecontent of refresher training programmes for senior investigating/prosecuting officials. The above responsibility for preparing training programmes for officials should be vested in the same Committee of senior officers referred to above. Judgments like the one in hand (depicting more than ten glaring lapses in the investigation/prosecution of the case), and similar other judgments, may also be added to the training programmes. The course-content will be reviewed by the above Committee annually, on the basis of fresh inputs, including emerging scientific tools of investigation, judgments of courts, and on the basis of experiences gained by the Standing Committee while examining failures, in unsuccessful prosecution of cases. We further

¶165

33

¶166

direct, that the above training programme be put in place within 6 months. This would ensure that those persons who handle sensitive matters concerning investigation/prosecution are fully trained to handle the same. Thereupon, if any lapses are committed by them, they would not be able to feign innocence when they are made liable to suffer departmental action for their lapses. 23 . On the culmination of a criminal case in acquittal, the investigating/prosecuting official(s) concerned responsible for such acquittal must necessarily be identified. A finding needs to be recorded in each case, whether the lapse was innocent or blameworthy. Each erring officer must suffer the consequences of his lapse, by appropriate departmental action, whenever called for. Taking into consideration the seriousness of the matter, the official concerned may be withdrawn from investigative responsibilities, permanently or temporarily, depending purely on his culpability. We also feel compelled to require the adoption of some indispensable measures, which may reduce the malady suffered by parties on both sides of criminal litigation. Accordingly, we direct the Home Department of every State Government to formulate a procedure for taking action against all erring investigating/prosecuting officials/officers. All such erring officials/officers identified,

¶167

34

¶168

as responsible for failure of a prosecution case, on account of sheer negligence or because of culpable lapses, must suffer departmental action. The above mechanism formulated would infuse seriousness in the performance of investigating and prosecuting duties, and would ensure that investigation and prosecution are purposeful and decisive. The instant direction shall also be given effect to within 6 months.

¶169

24. A copy of the instant judgment shall be transmitted by the Registry of this Court, to the Home Secretaries of all State Governments and Union Territories, within one week. All the Home Secretaries concerned, shall ensure compliance with the directions recorded above. The records of consideration, in compliance with the above direction, shall be maintained.

¶170

25. We hope and trust that the Home Department of the State of Gujarat, will identify the erring officers in the instant case, and will take appropriate departmental action against them, as may be considered appropriate, in accordance with law.”

¶171

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Edakkandi Dineshan vs. State of Kerala, (2025) 3 SCC 273 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as under:-

¶172

35

¶173

“ 26. A cumulative reading of the entire evidence on record suggests that the investigation has not taken place in a proper and disciplined manner. There are various areas where a proper investigation could have strengthened its case. In Paras Yadav v. State of Bihar [Paras Yadav v. State of Bihar, (1999) 2 SCC 126 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 104] , the Supreme Court observed as under : (SCC p. 130, para 8)

¶174

“8. … the lapse on the part of the investigating officer should not be taken in favour of the accused. It may be that such lapse is committed designedly or because of negligence. Hence, the prosecution evidence is required to be examined dehors such omissions to find out whether the said evidence is reliable or not. For this purpose, it would be worthwhile to quote the following observations of this Court from Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar [Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar, (1998) 4 SCC 517 : 1998 SCC (Cri) 1085] : (SCC pp. 523-24, para 13).

¶175

‘13. … In such cases, the story of the prosecution will have to be examined dehors such omissions and contaminated conduct of the officials otherwise the mischief which was

¶176

36

¶177

deliberately done would be perpetuated and justice would be denied to the complainant party and this would obviously shake the confidence of the people not merely in the law-enforcing agency but also in the administration of justice.’ ”

¶178

27. Hence, the principle of law is crystal clear that on the account of defective investigation the benefit will not inure to the accused persons on that ground alone. It is well within the domain of the courts to consider the rest of the evidence which the prosecution has gathered such as statement of the eyewitnesses, medical report, etc. It has been a consistent stand of this Court that the accused cannot claim acquittal on the ground of faulty investigation done by the prosecuting agency. As the version of eyewitnesses in specifically naming the appellants have been consistent throughout the trial, we find that there is enough corroboration to drive home the guilt of the accused persons. When the testimony of PW 1 Jitesh, PW 2 and PW 4 is seen cumulatively, their versions can be seen to be corroborating each other. All of them being eyewitnesses, what is material to be seen is their stand is consistent when they said that it was A-2 who was responsible for inflicting blows on both the deceased. It may not be out of place to mention that though the

¶179

37

¶180

unfortunate incident took place at midnight around 1 a.m., it was a full moon night and as such, it was not pitch dark. This has also not been vehemently disputed by the defence counsel. Hence, the version put forth by the prosecution witnesses inspires confidence of this Court. The specific role attributed by the prosecution witnesses cannot be challenged on extraneous grounds which have been raised by the defence. There is no contradiction when it comes to assigning specific role to the above accused. Admittedly, there was an enmity between the witnesses as they were from different political groups. Moreover, it can be seen from the record that the accused and the witnesses were well acquainted with each other as PW 1, PW 2 and PW 4 had defected from CPI and had joined RSS. The witnesses could have tried to implicate anyone had they wished to take advantage of their past acquaintance and recent rivalry.”

¶181

In light of the aforesaid judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and having due regard to the directions issued therein, it would be appropriate to direct the Home Department of the State of Chhattisgarh to examine the matter comprehensively in its entirety and take necessary action in accordance with law. The Department should ensure that responsibility shall be duly fixed upon the concerned police officials and other investigating agencies involved in the investigation, particularly in cases where

¶182

38

¶183

lapses, negligence, or procedural irregularities are found evident, so as to preserve the integrity of the investigative process and ensure accountability within the system.

¶184

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant/State is hereby dismissed with the observations made in the preceding paragraphs.

¶185

Sd/- Sd/-

¶186

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Judge

Raghu Jat

39

Head-Note

A lapse or omission by the investigating officer does not automatically benefit the accused. Such lapses may be due to negligence or otherwise, but they do not necessarily weaken the prosecution’s case. The court must independently examine the evidence, ignoring such omissions, to assess its reliability.

State Of Chhattisgarh v. Sanjeev Dhawan @ Monu Dhawan And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Of Chhattisgarh v. Sanjeev Dhawan @ Monu Dhawan And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Manohar Hardware Mart Vs Shri Rishabh Dev Mandir Trust

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication and Infrastructure Private Limited

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central ) Circle -1 (1), Vs M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication and Infrastructure Private Limited. 697

The Income Tax Officer Vs Shri Nand Kishor Agrawal

Satyaprakash Saraf Vs Smt. Asha Saraf

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Ramadhar Purame