Shripal And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appellant No.2- Ramjani S/o Bhuttan is reported to have died.

In view of above statement, the appeal qua appellant No.2- Ramjani S/o Shri Bhuttan stands abated.

So far as criminal appeal of accused-appellants-Shripal and Basir is concerned, this criminal appeal has been filed by the accused appellants challenging the judgment dated 21.07.1982, passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Deeg in Sessions Case No. 51/81, whereby the abovenamed accused appellants have been convicted and sentenced under Section 402 IPC for three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months R.I.

So far as accused appellants No.1-Shripal and No.3- Basir are concerned, the trial court has convicted them under Section 402 IPC.

As per prosecution case, the facts of the case in nutshell are that Omprakash Bohra, SHO, Deeg, received secrete information on 27.4.1981 that about 6 to 7 persons were preparing for dacoity. After receipt of aforesaid information, the SHO along with Police Personnel reached at the place of occurrence and they found 6-7 persons were whispering. The Police personnel surrounded the miscreants and put on the torch and coming up on light of torch, four miscreants ran away from the place of occurrence and two miscreants were arrested. On enquiry, the arrested miscreants stated the names of those persons who ran away from the place of occurrence and one of them was Basir Musalman, armed with 12 bore Katta. Pallets were seized from Basir Musalman. Site Plan of the place of occurrence was prepared, thereafter an FIR No. 78/1981 was registered at Police Station Deeg, District Bharatpur, for the offence under Section 399 and 402 IPC as also 3/25 of the Arms Act against the accused appellants.

The learned trial Court framed charges for the offences under Section 399 and 402 IPC against the accused appellants.

Prosecution in support of its case produced 5 witnesses and exhibited 8 documents. Thereafter, the statements of accused appellants were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. In defence the accused appellants did not examine any witness nor exhibited any document.

After completion of trial, the trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as mentioned above.

Learned counsel for the accused appellants argued that no case under Section 402 IPC is made out against the accused appellants. The whole case has been falsely prepared against the accused appellants. Learned counsel further argued that even if the prosecution version is taken on face value, no offence under Section 402 IPC can be said to be proved against the accused appellants. The essential ingredients constituting the offence punishable under Section 402 IPC are missing. The witnesses examined by the prosecution do not inspire any confidence. There is material discrepancies and contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses which belie each other. The identification parade of Basir suffers from serious infirmity and as such it is to be discarded.

Learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned judgment passed by the trial court and contended that there is no merit in this appeal and the same be dismissed.

I have considered the submissions of the learned Public Prosecutor and minutely scanned the impugned judgment as well as the record of the trial court.

Prosecution witness PW1-Kamlesh Kumar Sharma deposed that on 27.04.1981, he was posted at Police Station Deeg. He along with Omprakash, Rajaram, Bihari and other police personeel reached at the place of occurrence and they saw four persons ranning away. Two persons were armed with Katta arrested, out of those two persons, one disclosed his name as Shripal and another was Ramjani.

PW2-Neki Ram deposed that on 27.04.1981, he was posted as LC at Police Station, Seekri. He went along with SHO, Police Station Deeg.

PW3-Omprakash Bohra deposed that on 27.04.1981 he was posted as SHO, Police Station Deeg. PW3 stated that after receiving the secret information on 27.04.1981 at about 11.00PM, 6-7 persons were planning for committing dacoity. He along with police party reached at the place of occurrence and found that 6-7 persons were whispering. When the Police party put on the torch light, all the miscreants tried to flee from the place of occurrence.

PW2 stated that accused Basir was lateron arrested and subjected to test identification during investigation. PW3 admits that there was no independent witness examined except police personnel.

Prosecution witness deposed that after receiving secret information on 27.04.1981, police party proceeded to the place of occurrence and it is also admitted case that the vehicle was left at distance about half kilometer and accused appellants were found near the water well. It is also not the case of the prosecution that the accused appellants made attempt to assault on the person of police party. No material witness with regard to criminal antecedents of the accused appellants was produced by the prosecution. The prosecution witnesses admit that on the statements of accused appellants Shripal and Ramjani, other accused persons were arrested.

Recovery of country-made pistol not established, there is material contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses. The identification parade of accused Basir suffers from serious infirmities. Except police personnel, no independent witnesses were produced by the prosecution.

Thus, in the circumstances noted above, as a matter of abundant caution, this Court extend the benefit of doubt to the accused appellants Shripal and Basir. Thus, by extending the benefit of doubt, the appeal qua the accused-appellants Shripal and Basir is allowed and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 21.07.1982 passed by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Deeg, in Sessions Case No.51/1981 (State of Rajasthan v. Shripal & Ors.) is set aside and the accused appellants are acquitted of the charge under section 402 IPC. The accused appellants are on bail, their bail bonds stand cancelled.

In view of the provisions of Section 437-A Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, appellants Shripal Son of Shri Tola Singh @ Tola Ram and Basir son of Shri Yasin alias Aasin are directed to furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, and a surety in the like amount, before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, which shall be effective for a period of six months, with stipulation that in the event of Special Leave Petition being filed against this judgment or on grant of leave, the appellant aforesaid, on receipt of notice thereof, shall appear before the Supreme Court.