AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The instant cr. leave to appeal has been filed by the State of
Rajasthan under Section 378(iii) and (i) of the Cr.P.C . against the
judgment dated 5.8.2016 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions
Judge No.4, Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur in Sessions Case
NO.108/2012 (16/2015) by which the learned trial court acquitted
the respondents from the charge under Sections 341, 324,
324 / 34, 302, 302 / 34 IPC and under Section 4 / 25 of the Arms Act.
Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently argued that the FIR
was registered upon the complaint submitted by one Arjun Singh
(PW--10) on 5.8.2010. In the written report it is stated by the
complainant that on 15.8.2010 at about 11-11.15 am when his
brother Jitendra Singh was coming from his house and reached
near canal, at that time, near the house of Prem Singh, all of
sudden respondent Aslam son of Ramjan Khan, Manish sonof
Ramesh Raya and Pawan Solanki, caught his brother and gave
beating by hands and legs. The respondent Rahul Giri inflicted
knife blow on leg of his brother and upon hue and cry of Jitendra
Singh, the respondents ran away on motorcycle.
The injured was taken to the MG Hospital in three wheeler
of Surendra Singh and during the course of treatment, his brother
died.
Upon aforesaid report, FIR no.178/2010 was registered
under Section 143, 341 and 302 IPC and after investigation,
charge-sheet was filed against the respondents.
The learned trial court framed charges against the
respondent Rahul Giri for the offence under Sections 341, 324 and
302 IPC and under Section 4 / 25 of the Arms and against Manish
Arya and Salam Khan for the offence under Sections 341, 324 / 34
and 302 / 34 IPC but they denied the charges and prayed for trial.
To prove the prosecution case, statements of 16 witnesses
were recorded and 29 documents were exhibited during trial.
After recording evidence of prosecution, statement of all the
respondents were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., but they
refuted the allegations levelled by the prosecution and said that
they are innocent but no witness was produced by them.
The learned trial court after hearing the final arguments,
acquitted the respondents from the charges levelled against them
while giving benefit of doubt vide judgment dated 5.8.2016.
Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently argued that finding of
the learned trial court is erroneous because there is ample
evidence of eye witnesses to prove the case against the
respondents. It is also submitted that in the statements of eye
witnesses, there are allegations that Manish ARya and Aslam Khan
caught the deceased and Rahul Giri inflicted injury by knife and
due to the said injury he fell down and blood was oozing and later
on he died in the hospital.
Learned Public Prosecutor further argued that it is a case in
which deceased died due to injuries caused by the respondents,
but the learned trial court gave erroneous finding that whole
prosecution case is doubtful and acquitted the respondents,
therefore, the leave to appeal may kindly be granted against the
judgment impugned.
After hearing the learned Public Prosecutor we have perused
the entire evidence, so also, finding arrived at by the learned trial
court. The learned trial court after considering the entire evidence
gave finding that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond
reasonable doubt that occurrence took place on the date of
incident. Most of the witnesses refused to see the incident as
alleged by the complainant. The witness Rajendra Singh (PW--3)
turned hostile and did not prove the occurrence. The eye witness
PW--7 Surendra Singh in whose three wheeler the deceased was
taken to the hospital turned hostile and did not prove the fact that
deceased was taken to the hospital in his three wheeler.
The PW--8 Bhagwan Ram turned hostile and did not support
the prosecution case. The learned trial court observed in para
no.40 that all those witnesses produced by the prosecution as eye
witnesses namely Mahendra Singh, Rajendra, Surendra Singh and
Bhagwan Singh categorically stated before the court that no
occurrence took place in front of them. Therefore, the learned trial
court disbelieved the testimony of PW--9 Jitendra Singh and PW--
10 Arjun Singh and granted benefit of doubt to the respondents.
There is finding that recovery of knife from Rahul Giri is also
doubtful.
After perusing the finding of the learned trial court, we are
of the opinion that entire evidence has been considered properly
by the trial court and it has been held that prosecution has not
proved the allegation beyond doubt. Upon above discussion
coupled with findings we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case
to grant leave to appeal against the judgment impugned.
Therefore, the instant cr. leave to appeal filed by the State
of Rajasthan is hereby rejected.