DESHRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants Deshraj Singh and Ramratan @ Ratan Saini were indicted before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Sambhar Lake District Jaipur for having committed murder of Fattumal in Sessions Case No. 20/98. Learned trial Judge vide judgment dated March 31, 2001 convicted and sentenced the appellants u/s. 302 read with 32 Penal Code each to undergo Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000.00 in default to further suffer three Months Simple Imprisonment.

(2.) Put briefly the prosecution case is that on April 26, 1998 Hajari Lal Head Constable Incharge of Police Chowki Nimeda informed the SHO, Police Station Fagi around 3.45 p.m. that a dead body of unknown person was lying on the way near river Masi. On receiving the said information the police squad rushed to the spot and found a dead body of a person aged about 40 years. Proceedings u/s. 174 Crimial P.C. were initiated and investigation u/s. 302/201 Penal Code commenced. The inquest report was drawn, statements of witnesses were recorded and the appellants were arrested. At their instance the reading glasses allegedly belonging to deceased Fattumal and one stamp paper got recovered. On completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Sambhar Lake District Jaipur. Charges u/ss. 120B, 302 in the alternate 302 read with 34 and 201 read with 34 Penal Code were framed against the appellants who denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 28 witnesses. In their explanation u/s. 313 Crimial P.C., the appellants claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence as there is no direct evidence connected the appellants with the crime. It is settled legal procedure that where the evidence against the accused particularly when he is charged with grave offence like murder consists of only circumstances, it must be qualitatively such that on every reasonable hypothesis the conclusion must be that the accused is guilty, not fantastic possibilities nor freak inferences but rational deductions which reasonable minds make from the probative force of facts and circumstances.