Dismissed

Abid Mohammad Qureshi and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

Rajasthan HC6 Oct 2018SOSA/440/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed D.B. Criminal Misc. Applications seeking suspension of sentence for two connected appeals. Counsel for appellants challenged the quantum of circumstantial evidence, specifically the recovery of a stone, blood-stained clothes, and witness identifications. The court declined to examine merits, reserving issues for appeal hearings, and dismissed the suspension applications to pro

What did the court decide?

Applications for suspension of sentence dismissed; paper books directed to be submitted; appeals listed for hearing.

Abid Mohammad Qureshi and Ors. Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Criminal Misc. Application for Suspension of Sentence No.440/2018

¶3

¶4

D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 139/2018

¶5

Abid Mohammad Qureshi S/o Shri Fajlurrahman, R/o Plot No.37, Khurshid Ki Gali, Kachchi Basti, Mehnat Nagar, Sodala, Jaipur, Raj. At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur.

¶6

Mushtak Khan S/o Shri Mustfa, R/o 33, Rawalji Ka Bandha, Welcome Colony, Police Station Sodala, Jaipur, Raj. At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur.

¶7

Mohammad Asif S/o Shri Mohammad Ayub Khan B/c Musalman, R/o Rawalji Ka Bandha, Welcome Colony, Sodala, Jaipur, Raj. At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur.

¶8

----Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

Connected With

¶13

D.B. Criminal Misc. Application for Suspension of Sentence No.476/2018 In

¶14

D.B. Criminal Appeal (Db) No. 152/2018

¶15

Rafiq Qureshi S/o Shri Mohd. Ishaq, R/o Plot No.46, In Front Of Makka Masjid, Kachchi Basti, Mehnat Nagar, Hatwara Road, Sodala, Jaipur. Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur.

¶16

Arif Mohd. Qureshi S/o Shri Mohd. Ishaq @ Kalu Kabadi, R/o Plot No.46, In Front Of Makka Masjid, Kachchi Basti, Mehnat Nagar, Hatwara Road, Sodala, Jaipur. Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur.

¶17

----Appellants

¶18

Versus

¶19

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.

----Respondent

(2 of 5)

[CRLAD-139/2018]

For Appellant(s) : Mr.SR Surana, Sr.Adv. with Mr.SK Yadav Mr.Lakhan Singh Tomar with Mr.Mohd. Iqbal Khan For Respondent(s) : Ms.Sonia Shandilya, Public Prosecutor

¶24

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

¶25

Order

¶26

06/10/2018

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellants and learned Public Prosecutor on the applications for suspension for sentence.

¶28

Learned counsel for the accused-appellants submit that in a case of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution could not produce chain of circumstances to connect the accused-appellants with the crime. The accused-appellants were on bail during trial other than Abid Mohammad. It was taken into consideration that the deceased died out of excessive consumption of liquor.

¶29

The prosecution tried to connect the accused-appellants with the crime by recovery of a stone lying on the open ground ignoring that the place of occurrence was not preserved by the police immediately after reaching on the spot.

¶30

It is also stated that as per the statement of PW – 25 Mangu Singh, a case for the offence under Section 201 IPC is not made out. The body was lying on the open place thus a case under Section 201 IPC is not made out. It is further stated that the statements of PW – 22 Benu @ Banu Begum and PW – 23 Shabnam Hussain for last seen should not have been believed by the trial Court. They did not name the accused-appellants during the course of investigation. In absence of evidence of last seen,

¶31

(3 of 5)

¶32

[CRLAD-139/2018]

¶33

naming the accused-appellants, the trial Court should not have drawn conclusions on it. In view of the above also, the applications for suspension of sentence may be accepted. It is moreso when, PW – 25 Mangu Singh has also admitted that there is no evidence for last seen.

¶34

The recovery of blood stained clothes alone is not sufficient to connect the accused-appellant with the crime. It is moreso when, the blood group remains unconclusive for few articles. The prayer is accordingly to suspend the sentence of the accused-appellants.

¶35

Learned Public Prosecutor has contested the applications for suspension of sentence. It is submitted that the prosecution could prove its case beyond doubt despite a case of circumstantial evidence. It is not only that PW – 22 Benu @ Banu Begum but PW – 23 Shabnam Hussain are the witnesses for last seen, though, they did not name the accused-appellants in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. but in the Court, they identified the accused-appellants.

¶36

PW – 22 Benu @ Banu Begum is mother of the deceased and has given cause of occurrence also. The accused and the deceased were seen fighting during the day hours and subsequently, the deceased was found dead, though, the body was recovered after few days, that too, in half burnt condition. The case of falling after excessive consumption of liquor is thus not made out. The body was found in half burnt condition, which can be only when somebody did it to suppress the evidence. A case for the offence under Section 201 IPC is thus made out. The trial Court has rightly convicted the accused-appellants for the offence under Sections 302 and 201 IPC.

¶37

(4 of 5)

¶38

[CRLAD-139/2018]

¶39

A reference of the Exhibit P - 19 to P – 23 has been given to show recovery of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused-appellants. It was under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for short “the Act of 1872”) . The blood stained clothes were sent for FSL report, which is exhibited as P – 41 to P – 46. The blood group on the clothes was also determined, which was “B” group matching to the blood group of the deceased. In few cases, blood group remained unconclusive, although, human blood was found. The accused-appellants failed to make statement on recovery of the blood stained clothes while making statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The recovery of blood stained clothes, at the instance of the accused-appellants, was again a connecting evidence, thus, not only motive was shown but the evidence of last seen was produced. The recovery of blood stained clothes exists apart from recovery of stone, by which, the accused-appellants gave blow to the deceased. PW – 9 Dr. Anil Solanki has given cause of death. In view of the above, the applications for suspension of sentence may not be accepted even if the four accused-appellants were on bail during trial leaving one.

¶40

We have considered rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶41

Learned counsel for the accused-appellants have elaborately argued the case to show that a case is not made out to connect the accused-appellants with the crime and, at the same time, learned Public Prosecutor has shown evidence to connect the accused-appellants with the crime. The blood stained clothes were recovered at the instance of the accused-appellants, that too, under Section 27 of the Act of 1872. Exhibit P-41 to P-46 show

¶42

(5 of 5)

¶43

[CRLAD-139/2018]

¶44

human blood on the clothes and in few cases, even blood group has been detected matching with the blood group of the deceased.

¶45

At this stage, any other comment may cause prejudice to either of the parties while arguing the appeals finally, thus, we are refraining ourselves to make further comment on merit of the case, rather, keeping it reserve for the respective counsel to argue at the time of hearing of the appeals but taking into consideration the overall facts of this case, we are not inclined to accept the applications for suspension of sentence.

¶46

Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence are dismissed.

¶47

Learned counsel for the accused-appellants are directed to submit the paper book. It may then be checked by the Registry and immediately thereupon, let the appeals be listed for hearing.

¶48

A copy of this order be placed in connected file.

¶49

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR), J

¶50

Preeti/2-3

Abid Mohammad Qureshi and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abid Mohammad Qureshi and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

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

Alladdin Mehrat Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Anil Kumar Jain Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Mukesh Goyal Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Hanuman S/O Shri Moti Lal B/C Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Jagdish Kumar Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.

Bhobal Singh and Ors. Vs State