Dismissed

State of Rajasthan v. Veer Singh and Anr.

Rajasthan HC20 Nov 2018CRLA/1108/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeals filed by the Complainant-Appellant and the State of Rajasthan against the acquittal of accused Veer Singh and Natthi Ram by the Additional Sessions Judge. The High Court dismissed the appeals, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to hostile witnesses and lack of corroborative evidence, thereby rightly bestowing the benefit of doubt on the accuse

What did the court decide?

Acquittal of Veer Singh and Natthi Ram stands affirmed; appeals dismissed; impugned order of the Additional Sessions Judge upheld.

State of Rajasthan Vs Veer Singh and Anr. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

1. S.B. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.850/2014

¶3

Prabho Devi W/o Mangal Ram, Aged 79 years, Resident of Alipur Police Station Mundawar District Alwar.

¶4

----Complainant-Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Rajasthan through the P.P.

¶7

---Respondent

¶8

Veer Singh

¶9

Natthi Ram

¶10

Both sons of Surajbhan, by caste Gurjar, R/o Alipur Police Station Mundawar District Alwar.

¶11

---Accused Respondents

¶12

2. S.B. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1108/2014

State of Rajasthan

----Appellant

Versus

Veer Singh son of Surajbhan by caste Gurjar, aged 23 years, resident of Alipur, Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

¶17

Nathi Ram @ Lala Ram son of Surajbhan by caste Gurjar, aged 23 years, resident of Alipur, Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

¶18

----Accused Respondents.

¶19

For Appellant(s)	: Mr.AK Gupta with Mr.Rinesh Gupta
	and Ms.Mudita Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.Pankaj Sisodia, Public Prosecutor
	Mr.Sandeep Pathak with Ms.Jaya
	S.Pathak – for accused

¶20

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

Judgment

20/11/2018

(2 of 4)

[CRLA-850/2014]

These appeals have been filed against the order dated 18^th July, 2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Kishangarhbas, District Alwar, whereby, the accused Veer Singh s/o Surajbhan Singh and Natthi Ram @ Lalaram s/o Surajbhan Singh have been acquitted for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 324, 325, 326 and 307 read with Section 34 IPC. They have been given benefit of doubt to acquit them from the offences.

¶26

It is a case where a private complaint was made before the Judicial Magistrate, Mundawar on 10^th August, 2010 by the complainant-appellant regarding an incident, which took place on 06^th August, 2010 at around 9 to 10 AM. It was stated that while the appellant and her son Mahesh were in their house, the accused Veer Singh, Natthiram @ Lalaram, Surajbhan, Santosh w/o Natthi Ram @ Lala, Savita, Sheobai and Smt. Basanti Devi came equipped with “Lathi” and “Farsi” and attacked on them. Surajbhan caused a blow to Mahesh on his head by an axe. Natthiram @ Lalaram caused blow to Mahesh on his back by “Farsi”. Surajbhan caused injury to Mahesh on his back by a “Lathi”, whereas, Smt. Basanti Devi and Santhosh used “Lathi” to cause a blow on the hand of the appellant.

¶27

Learned Magistrate passed an order under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and thereupon, an FIR bearing No.297/2010 was registered for the offence under Sections 143, 323, 341 and 452 IPC. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed against accused Veer Singh and Natthi @ Lalaram for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 324, 325, 326 and 307/34 IPC. The trial Court framed charges and when the same were not confessed, trial commenced. The prosecution produced twenty one witnesses and twenty one documents to prove their case. Statements of accused

¶28

(3 of 4)

¶29

[CRLA-850/2014]

¶30

were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The prosecution could not prove its case beyond doubt, thus trial Court acquitted the accused from all the offences.

¶31

The perusal of the record so as the order passed by the trial Court shows that majority of the witnesses turned hostile, thus they had not supported the prosecution case.

¶32

PW – 6 Hargyan has not supported the prosecution case. It was stated that he has not seen the occurrence. PW – 7 Lili has also not supported the prosecution case, thus declared hostile. In the same manner, witnesses to the recovery of weapons did not support the prosecution case. They were also declared hostile. The witnesses, who have supported the prosecution case did not stand in the cross-examination.

¶33

Taking into consideration the aforesaid, when the prosecution could not bring evidence to prove their case beyond doubt, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the trial Court to acquit the accused. In this regard, reference of the statements of PW – 16 Jainarayan and PW – 17 Ramphal would also be relevant. PW – 16 Jainarayan had not supported recovery of axe from accused Veer Singh, whereas, PW – 17 Ramphal has not supported the occurrence. PW – 18 Om Prakash has shown recovery of weapon at the instance of accused Veer Singh and Natthi @ Lalaram but in the cross-examination, they did not stand. It is also a fact that delay of four days in filing private complaint also remained unexplained.

¶34

Taking into consideration the aforesaid, we do not find any reason to cause interference in the order passed by the trial Court so as to convict the accused Veer Singh and Natthi @ Lalaram for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 324, 325, 326

¶35

(4 of 4)

¶36

[CRLA-850/2014]

¶37

and 307 read with Section 34 IPC when the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond doubt. Accordingly, the trial Court has rightly given benefit of doubt to acquit the accused from all the offences.

¶38

Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed.

¶39

A copy of this order be placed in connected file.

¶40

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J

¶41

(M.N. BHANDARI),J

¶42

Preeti/61-62

State of Rajasthan v. Veer Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Rajasthan v. Veer Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Trilok Singh S/O Shri Bheru Singh B/C Rawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Mangli Devi Wife of Shri Radheyshyam Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagirath S/O Shri Ramswroop B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through the Secretary Home

Nizambaksh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.

Chandra Mohan Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Hargyan and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan through P P