AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Criminal Appeal under Section 378(3) & (1) Cr.P.C . has
been filed on behalf of the appellant - State of Rajasthan being
aggrieved with the judgment dated 25.11.1994 passed by the
learned Judge, Special Court, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities),
Udaipur (hereinafter to be referred as ''the trial Court'') in Sessions
Case No. 5/1993 titled as "State of Rajsthan through Special
Public Prosecutor Vs. Vinod Kumar" whereby, the learned trial
Court has acquitted the accused/respondent for the offences
punishable under Section 498-A and 307 IPC.
The brief facts of the case are that PW-1 Rameshwar Lal
Joshi has submitted a written report to the Superintendent of
Police, Udaipur stating therein that marriage of her daughter (Alka
Sharma) was solemnized with the accused/respondent (Vinod
Kumar) on 29.04.1992 and after that, she is residing in her in-
laws house. It was alleged that the accused/respondent (Vinod
Kumar Sharma) and his mother used to harass his daughter
regularly while stating that you are not serving in any Government
service and, therefore, you should live at your father''s house and
prepare for entering into any service. The accused/respondent
used to say that as he is not earning enough money and you
(Alka) have not brought anything in dowry, therefore, you should
remain live with you father. It was further stated in the FIR that
on 09.10.1992, the accused/respondent (Vinod Kumar) has
hatched a conspiracy with his mother and has tried to kill his
daughter by strangulating her. It was further stated that his
daughter was taken to the hospital at Udaipur in an unconscious
position and after receiving this information, he went to the
hospital where he saw that his daughter is admitted and her
treatment is going on.
On receiving this report, the Police Station Surajpole,
Udiapur has registered Case No. 384/1992 for the offences
punishable under Sections 498-A and 307 IPC (FIR Ex. P/7).
After investigation, the Police has filed the charge-sheet
against the accused/respondent for the aforesaid offences and the
learned trial Court has also framed charges for the offences
punishable under Sections 498-A and 307 IPC on 28.07.1993.
To prove the charges against the accused/respondent, the
prosecution has got examined as many as 15 witnesses and has
also got exhibited 9 documents.
Statements of the accused/respondent were recorded under
Section 313 Cr.P.C. However, no evidence was produced in
defence.
The learned trial Court, after taking into consideration the
entire evidence available on record and after appreciating the
same, has acquitted the accused/respondent from the charges for
which he was charged while giving benefit of doubt vide judgment
dated 25.11.1994 under appeal.
Being aggrieved with the judgment impugned dated
25.11.1994 passed by the learned trial Court, the appellant -
State of Rajasthan has preferred the instant criminal appeal.
Learned Public Prosecutor Mr. K.V. Vyas appearing for the
appellant State of Rajasthan has submitted that from the
statements of PW-1 Rameshwar Lal Joshi, PW-4 Alka Sharma, PW-
2 Sushila, PW-3 Bhatrat Kumar, PW-5 Ashok and PW-10 Rajesh
Sharma, it is proved that the accused/respondent (Vinod Kumar
Sharma) has treated PW-4 Alka Sharma with cruelty for the
purpose of dowry and has strangulated her on 09.10.1992 with
the intention to kill her. It is contended that the learned trial
Court, without appreciating the prosecution evidence in right
perspective, has illegally acquitted the accused/respondent from
the charges for which he has been charged though the allegations
for the aforesaid charges have been proved by the prosecution by
producing cogent and reliable evidence. Learned Public Prosecutor
has, therefore, prayed that this criminal appeal may kindly be
allowed and the impugned judgment may kindly be set aside and
the accused/respondent may be convicted for the offences for
which he was charged and may kindly be suitably sentenced.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
accused/respondent has argued that there is no illegality in the
judgment dated 25.11.1994 passed by the learned trial Court
whereby, the accused/respondent was acquitted as the
prosecution has failed to prove the allegations levelled against the
accused/respondent beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, the
learned trial Court has not committed any error or illegality in
acquitting the accused/respondent. Learned counsel for the
accused/respondent has invited the attention of this Court towards
the statements of PW-4 Alka Sharma i.e., Ex.D/4 and Ex. D/5
recorded respectively by the Police and Tehsildar concerned, just
after the incident and has argued that in the said statements, PW-
4 Alka Sharma has not complained for the ill-treatment by the
accused/respondent and she has specifically stated that she has
tried to commit suicide at her own.
Learned counsel for the accused/respondent has further
submitted that the learned trial Court has taken into consideration
the contradictions in the Police statements as well the Court
statements of the other witnesses and has rightly held that the
prosecution witnesses, who are relatives of PW-4 Alka Sharma
have improved a lot during the Court statements only with the
intention to falsely implicate the accused/respondent (Vinod
Kumar Sharma) and to save her from the criminal proceedings to
be initiated against her for attempting to commit suicide. Learned
counsel for the accused/respondent submitted that there is no
force in the present appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed
and the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court is
not liable to interfered with.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and after
carefully scrutinizing the record of the case, this Court is of the
opinion that the present criminal appeal preferred on behalf of the
State of Rajasthan deserves to be dismissed.
The incident, for which the FIR (Ex. P/1) was lodged by the
PW-1 Rameshwar Lal Joshi (father of PW-4 Alka Sharma), took
place on 09.10.1992. The First Information Report for the said
incident was lodged at the instance of PW-1 Rameshwar Lal Joshi
on 13.10.1992. On 13.10.1992, statements of PW-4 Alka Sharma
were recorded by the Police at 1:20 pm wherein, she has not
levelled any allegations regarding dowry or attempt to murder by
the accused/respondent (Vinod Kumar Sharma). On the other
hand, she has stated that she was disturbed on account of
ignorance of her husband towards her and his illness. Later on,
on the very same day, i.e., 13.10.1992, her statements were
recorded by the Tehsildar, Girwa at 5:00 pm wherein also, she has
not levelled any allegations against the accused/respondent or his
family members and has simply said that she do not know what
happened to her. However, later on, in her Court statements, she
has completely changed the story and has levelled allegations of
demand of dowry and attempt to murder against the
accused/respondent (Vinod Kumar Sharma).
The learned trial Court has taken into the consideration the
said facts of the case and has opined that the allegations levelled
by PW-4 Alka Sharma in her Court statements cannot be believed
as she has improved a lot in her statements and has stated such
things which she has not stated during the police statements.
The learned trial Court has also taken into consideration the
contradictions in the Police statements and the Court statements
of PW-1 Rameshwar Lal Joshi (father of PW-4 Alka Sharma), PW-2
Smt. Sushila (mother of PW-4 Alka Sharma), PW-3 Bharat Kumar
(brother of PW-4 Alka Sharma), PW-5 Ashok and PW-10 Rajesh
Sharma (maternal uncle of PW-4 Alka Sharma). The learned trial
Court has also taken into consideration that apart from
contradictions in the Police statements and the Court statements
of all the above witnesses, the evidence of all the above named
witnesses has not been corroborated with each other and all the
witnesses have given contradictory statements.
The learned trial Court has also taken into consideration the
fact of recovery of Saree at the instance of the
accused/respondent on 28.10.1992 whereas the incident took
place on 09.10.1992 and in between this period, on 17.10.1992,
the Police has inspected the site where the alleged incident took
place. The learned trial Court has, therefore, not relied upon the
said recovery of Saree alleged to have been used for strangulating
PW-4 Alka Sharma.
The learned trial Court has also taken into consideration the
fact that as per statement of PW-4 Alka Sharma at the time of
incident, she and accused/respondent (Vinod Kumar Sharma)
were alone in the house and looking to this fact, it is not believed
that though the accused/respondent wants to kill his wife (Alka
Sharma) but despite having opportunity, has not killed her and
has taken her to the hospital after the alleged incident. The
learned trial Court, after taking into consideration the above facts
and circumstances, has held that the prosecution has failed to
prove the charges against the accused/ respondent, for which he
was charged, beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, the
accused/respondent is liable to be acquitted from the said charges
while giving benefit of doubt.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after having
pondering over the entire record and evidence of the case
available on record, I am not inclined to interfere with the
judgment dated 25.11.1994 passed by the learned trial Court.
Hence, this criminal appeal is dismissed.