STATE OF H P Vs. RATTANI @ RAJNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal, is, directed by the State against, the pronouncement made by the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, H.P., upon, Sessions Trial No.6-S/7 of 2011, wherethrough, he acquitted, the accused/respondent herein, vis-a-vis, offences punishable, under, Section 302, and, under Section 201 of the IPC.

(2.) The genesis of the prosecution case, is, embodied in Ex.PW1/A, exhibit whereof embodies a statement of one Smt. Priti Devi, recorded under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C., wherein, she narrates, her suspicion, vis-a-vis, the demise of one Sat Pal, being caused by, the, accused/respondent herein. The accused, is, alleged to be, a regular visitor to the house of the deceased, and, also, is alleged to be, exclusively serving the mother of the deceased. Both, the accused, and, the deceased are alleged, to, on the fateful day, consume liquor, and, thereafter an altercation is alleged to erupt inter se both, and, in course thereof, the accused is alleged to, with user of iron pipe (phukna), Ex.P-5, hence recovered through Ex.PW3/B, and, preceding whereof a disclosure statement of the accused, borne in Ex.PW4/C became recorded, rather, inflict fatal blows, on various portions of the body of the deceased, and, as, become echoed, in, the postmortem report, embodied in Ex.PW19/B.

(3.) The learned Sessions Judge, while proceeding to record an order of acquittal, vis-a-vis, the charges framed against the accused, for his, committing offences punishable, under, Section 302, and, under Section 201 of the IPC, had anchored his reasoning, upon, (a) the mother of the deceased, though, being available, at the relevant time, in the house, whereat, the demise/murder of the deceased one Sat Pal, had occurred, and, hence, despite hers being, a, material prosecution witness, yet hers neither being cited as a prosecution witness nor hers standing examined in Court, per se, thereupon, hence rendering the attribution of guilt to the accused, to, rather founder. (b) PW-3 and PW-4, the witnesses, to, the disclosure statement, made by the accused, and, as borne in Ex.PW4/C, and, in pursuance whereto, the recovery of weapon of offence, Ex.P-5 was made, under Ex.PW3/B, both resiling from their respectively recorded previous statements in writing, (c) and, thereupon, both, the disclosure statement, and, the apposite recovery memo, wherethrough Ex.P-5, the alleged weapon of offence, stood recovered, hence losing their apposite evidentiary worth. (e) No blood stains being reported in the report of the FSL, as, becomes embodied in Ex.PW25/P, to exist, on the duster/piece of cloth, with user whereof, the accused allegedly wiped the blood stains allegedly, borne on Ex.P-5, the alleged weapon of offence. (f) no stains of blood being reported in the report of the FSL, as, borne in Ex.PW15/A, to exist on Ex.P-5, the alleged weapon of offence. (g) The motive for the commission of the alleged offence(s), inasmuch, as their existing illicit relations among the accused, and, the deceased, and, also bickerings amongst both, arising, and, rather sparked by financial dealings, remaining unproven by the prosecution.