STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MANGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO ghastly murders of father and son, namely Siremal and Bandmal took place in their shop situated in village Undri, District Barmer, on the night intervening 21st and 22nd June, 1968. The culprit or culprits, as the case may be, after committing the said murders, put the shop on fire and decamped with the valuables lying therein. The crime was detected early in the morning when the shop was found enveloped in flames and attracted the notice of the villagers who went to the spot and tried to extinguish it. A first information report was lodged by one Mahinga on 22nd June, 1968 at about 8. a. m. at Police Station Gura Malani situated at a distance of about 16 miles from the place of occurrence, namely village Undri. In the course of investigation, the Police arrested the two accused Manga and Gulaba on 23rd October, 1969 in village Kasumba in the State of Gujarat. On interrogating the accused, Manga gave information on 26th October, 1969 recorded as Ex. P-23 which led to the recovery of Rs. 640/- cash and a gold ring Ex. M-2 from one Raoji who is said to have employed Manga and with whom Manga had deposited the cash and the ring. The recovery memo in respect of the cash and the ring is Ex. P-22. After both the accused had been brought to Rajasthan on 30th October, 1969. Manga gave another information to the police exhibited as Ex. P-24 in consequence of which 16 articles of gold and silver were recovered from under a Jal tree near Jogiyon-ki-Chhatri in village Ratanpura. The recovery memo is Ex. P-17 and it is the case of the prosecution that the articles were lying hidden from the view of the passersby, as they lay buried in the sand. On the same day, the accused Manga gave another piece of information Ex. P-25 regarding the axe alleged to have been used in committing the offence. But this information is of no consequence as no recovery was made in pursuance of it. Again on the same day, that is, 30th October, 1969, the other accused Gulaba gave information marked Ex. P-26 in consequence of which 12 articles were recovered at his instance at a distance of about 10 paces from where the articles vide recovery memo Ex. P-27 had been recovered at the instance of Manga. These 12 articles were also ornaments of gold and silver alleged to be in possession of the deceased before their death. All the articles recovered at the instance of these two accused except cash were put up for identification. Thereafter, both the accused were prosecuted.

(2.) DURING the course of trial, the prosecution relied on an extra-judicial confession alleged to have been made by the accused and four other circumstances to connect them with the crime of the two murders. In the first instance, the prosecution tried to prove that both the accused had adequate motive to take the lives of Siremal and Bandmal -. The prosecution has also endeavoured to show that soon after the perpetration of the crime, both the accused absconded and were traced only when they were arrested in the State of Gujarat in village Kasumba. Yet another circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is that on the day of occurrence, the accused were in the village in the vicinity of the place of occurrence and they had put an employee of the deceased out of way in order to seek, an opportunity to commit the crime. The last and the most important circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is the recovery of the articles mentioned above.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, who tried the case came to the conclusion that the recovery of the articles at the instance of Manga vide recovery memo Ex. P-22 and Ex. P-17 as also the recovery of the articles at the instance of Gulaba vide Ex. P-18 have been proved to the hilt. The recoverey of the cash and the ring at the instance of Manga vide recovery memo Ex. P-ll was, however, not believed. The learned Sessions Judge has further found that the articles proved to have been recovered at the instance of the two accused are proved to belong to the deceased and were at any rate in their possession before the alleged murder. However, in his view this recovery was not sufficient to raise a presumption that the accused had committed the murders while committing robbery. The other circumstances relied upon by the prosecution were, however, held to be not proved. In this view of the matter, he acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 302/ 34, Indian Penal Code and convicted them under Section 411, Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to two years' rigorous imprisonment each and a fine of Rs, 300/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo further three months' rigorous imprisonment each. The accused were also acquitted of other charges under Sections 436, 457 and 380, Indian Penal Code. Aggrieved by their convictions and senlences, the accused have filed appeal to this Court which has been registered as S. B. Criminal Appeal No. 570/ 72. The State has also filed appeal from their acquittal under other offences of which they have been charged.