STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RAMKUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent Ramkumar Singh was acquitted of the offences under sections 397 and 307, I.P.C., by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Churu, by his judgment dated 22.12.1972.

(2.) The prosecution case in nutshell, is that on 12.9.1971 at about 3.30 p.m., the accused- respondent came in the filed of Mst. Anki. The respondent inquired Mst. Anki as to whose field that is. Thereupon she replied that it belongs to Swamis. The accused, thereupon, asked her to handover Borla and Galsari. Thereupon she said that she will call her father-in-law. According to Mst. Anki, the accused took out her revolver and at revolver point she was relieved of her Galsari and Borla and she was again threatened not to raise any alarm, else he will fire a shot with pistol. Thereafter the accused ran away from her field. Mst. Anki raised an alarm and called Shivji Mali. It is alleged that both of them followed the accused raising shouts Chor Chor. The accused entered into the town of Sardar Sahar. People from the locality, hearing the alarm, chased him and at some distance in hot pursuit apprehended the accused. Before he was actually apprehended, it is alleged that the accused fired shots from his revolver aiming at some witnesses. As per the prosecution case, unfolded in the first information report lodged by Bhikamchand, Shivji Mali and Anki wife of Bhanwar Lal arrived at the place where the accused was apprehended. The accused was having a bag. The occurrence was narrated by Mst. Anki that at the revolver point she was relieved of Galsari and Borla both made of gold. But the ornaments were taken out from the bag and shown to Mst. Anki. She said that both these belonged to her. Thereafter some persons went to the police station. The police arrived at the place where the accused was caught hold of and then Bhikamchad and others took the accused to the police station, Sardar Sahar and produced the accused along with the bag. Report of the occurrence was lodged at 5.00 p.m., by Bhikharchand. Thereupon a case under sections 392 and 307, I.P.C. was registered. The S.H.O. Shikharchand (P.W. 8) arrested the accused and prepared the arrest and the personal search memo (Ex. P15). The revolver and the ornaments were seized from the custody of the accused. Investigation was conducted from the witnesses and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was presented against the accused. The accused was committed for trial to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Churu. Charges under sections 397 and 307, I.P.C., were framed against the accused. The accused, however; pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. At the trial, the prosecution examined P.W. 1 Bhikam Chand, P.W. 2 Nanuram, P.W. 3 Narain Singh, P.W. 4 Mst. Anki, P.W. 5 Khinv Chand, P.W. 6 Baldass, P.W. 7 Manakchand and P.W. 8 Shikharchand. The statement of the accused was recorded, in which he came out with the version that on 12.9.1971, he was proceeding to his Susral, but as it was darkness at the bus stand, where he got down, so he concealed himself sitting waiting for the bus. He stated that he was absconding in a case registered at the Police Station, Sardar Sahar, so out of fear, he was sitting concealed on one side at the bus stand. He had a bag, which contained his wifes ornaments, namely. Borla and Galsari and also his pistol. A crowd came near him and thinking him to be a thief in misapprehension, be laboured him with lath is and Kulharis on account of which he became unconscious. When he gamed conscious, he found himself at the Police Station. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after trial found that the offences under sections 397 and 307, I.P.C. are not proved against the accused in as such as no test identification parade of the accused was got conducted and nor test identification parade of the ornaments was not conducted. The learned Sessions Judge further observed that the Shivji Mali was a material witness, who was not examined. Besides that, he also noticed some discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses with regard to the recovery of the ornaments Khinv Chand stated that the ornaments were taken out by the accused from the pocket of his Kurta. So far as the offence under sections 307, I.P.C., is concerned, he took the view that despite thing several shots, no shot was effective, so the story of firing is fake. Thus, finding the infirmities of non-conduct of identification parades and finding that the story of firing shots is incredible, acquitted the accused of both the offences. The learned Additional Sessions Judge believed this part of the version of the accused that the ornaments belonged to the wife of the accused, so ordered return of the ornaments to the accused. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the State has preferred this appeal.

(3.) We have heard Shri M.C. Bhati, learned Public Prosecutor, for the State, and Shri Niranjan Gaur, amicus curiae, for the accused-respondent, and we have perused the record of the case carefully.