RAJAL DEVI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred on behalf of the complainant-victim Smt. Rajal Devi challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment dtd. 24/12/2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 6, Jodhpur Metro in Sessions Case No. 76/2018 (NCV No. 76/2018) whereby the accused-respondents have been acquitted from the charges under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 5/2/2018 Rajal Devi Complainant/victim lodged an FIR No. 18/2018 (Ex. P/23) at the Police Station Mathania, Jodhpur against the accused-respondents Shravan Ram @ Rathor Ram, Raturam and Lokendra alleging inter alia that on 4/2/2018 at around 9:00-10:00 p.m. her brother Birbal Ram went to Malunga to attend a banquet held by the Nat community. The accused-respondents Rotu Ram, Neelkamal, Shravan Ram, Penpa Ram and Lokendra killed her brother by forcing him to drink liquor. She was not sure whether poison was administered in the liquor or he (Birbal Ram) died due to internal injuries inflicted to him. Thereafter, one Reshma Ram and his son Parmeshwar saw her brother Birbal Ram in an unconscious condition and he was taken to hospital for treatment. During the course of treatment, Birbal Ram passed away. The dead body of Birbal Ram was subjected to postmortem and as per the postmortem report (Ex. P.21) the cause of death was poisoning as a result of consumption of organophosphorus insecticide and alcohol associated with assault prior to death.

(3.) On the basis of the aforementioned report, FIR No. 18/2018 (Ex. P/23) came to be registered at the Police Station Mathania for the offences under Ss. 143, 302 and 328 of the IPC and investigation commenced. After usual investigation, accused Shravan Ram @ Rathore Ram, Rotu Ram and Lokendra were arrested and a charge sheet accusationed against them for committing the offence under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC in the court of the concerned Magistrate came to be submitted. The case was committed to the court of Sessions Judge, Jodhpur Metro from where, it was transferred for trial to the court of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 6, Jodhpur Metro. The trial court framed charges against the accused-respondents for the offence under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the I.P.C. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses and 41 documents were tendered into evidence to substantiate the charge. Two witnesses were examined in defence. Thereafter, an explanation under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. was sought wherein the accused-respondents claimed the evidence to be false. After hearing the parties and appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial Court acquitted the accused-respondents from the charges vide judgment dtd. 24/12/2019. Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal complainant/victim Rajal Devi has preferred the instant appeal under Sec. 378(4) Cr.P.C. for assailing the impugned judgment. Although it ought to have been filed under the proviso of Sec. 372 of Cr.P.C., however, we are allowing to treat the same as an appeal of victim against acquittal. Hence this appeal.