STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. POORAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT criminal appeal has come up for hearing upon application filed by the respondent praying that respondent may be exempted from giving appearance twice in a year before the learned District & Sessions Judge, Merta. During course of arguments, however, in view of the fact that appeal itself is pending since 1993, preferred by the State against judgment of acquittal, with the consent of the parties, final arguments on the appeal itself have been heard.

(2.) IN this appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan, judgment dated 26.08.1992 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Merta in Sessions Case No.1/89 is under challenge, whereby, the learned trial Court acquitted the respondent from the charges levelled against him for offences under Sections 302 and 201, I.P.C. Facts of the case indicate that on 06.09.1988, at about 1.45 P.M., P.W.-1 Hanuman filed a report at Police Station Nawa City stating therein that he is having agriculture field in village Nawa, situated near Bhiwara Nada, in which, he has sown bajra and, on 06.091988, at about 12 P.M., when he went to his field, he found that a dead body was lying in his agriculture field which was covered with a red bed-sheet and only hands of the body were visible. Upon this report, inquest proceedings under Section 174, Cr.P.C. was initiated and Police Station Nawa City proceeded to make investigation in the matter.

(3.) WE have also perused the finding of the learned trial Court with regard to recovery and last seen. In our opinion, the learned trial Court, after considering the entire material on record, discussed the entire evidence in right perspective and held that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, the respondent is entitled to be acquitted from the charges levelled against him. It appears from the entire discussion made by the trial Court that chain of circumstances has not been so formed to bring home guilt upon the respondent- accused. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Jaharlal Das Vs. State of Orissa, AIR 1991 SC 1388, we are satisfied that prosecution has failed to prove the case before the court and there is no evidence on record, upon which, finding of guilt can be arrived at against the respondent- accused. So also, there is no material on record to prove that the circumstances taken cumulatively can form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probabilities the crime was committed by the accused and none else. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that no error has been committed by the trial Court while acquitting the respondent from the charges levelled against him. More so, entire evidence placed on record by the prosecution creates serious doubt with regard to commission of the offence by the respondent,