Sohit Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 15361 Raj

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
              D.B. Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 56/2021
Sohit Kumar S/o Sh. Devi Singh Labana, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Near Kenhi School, Khandu Colony, Bhawanpura, Banswara,
District Banswara, Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan.
2.     Pankaj @ Pinkesh son of Shri Nanji, Rresident of Jhupail,
       P.S. Sadar Banswara, District Banswara.
                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore.
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC.


           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

                             JUDGMENT



Date of Judgment :::           04/10/2021



BY THE COURT : (PER HON'BLE MEHTA, J.)

1. The appellant complainant Sohit Kumar has approached this

Court by way of this appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C. seeking to

assail the Judgment dated 28.01.2021 passed by the learned

Sessions Judge, Banswara in Sessions Case No.184/2017 (State

vs. Ramesh & Ors.) whereby, the respondent No.2 Pankaj @

Pinkesh was acquitted from the offences punishable under

Sections 302/34 and 460 of the IPC.

2. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal

are noted herein below:

(2 of 4) [CRLA-56/2021]

3. The appellant complainant Sohit Kumar (PW-3) lodged a

written report (Ex.P/3) at the Police Station Kotwali Banswara on

04.09.2017 alleging inter alia that his agricultural land was located

in the village Thikariya. His vehicles were parked there. The

complainant's maternal uncle Laxman Singh (the deceased) used

to stay there to guard the property. Two days earlier, the

complainant's maternal aunt Saju Devi also came and started

living with her husband Shri Laxman Singh. On 03.09.2017, in the

night at about 11 O' Clock, Gopal, Ravji and others came to the

appellant's house in Khanda Colony after having worked in the

field. At about 11.17 pm., the complainant got a call from the

mobile of her maternal aunt Saju Devi (No.8854971075) who

informed the complainant that some thieves had beaten Shri

Laxman Singh Ji up and that he was bleeding from the head. The

complainant rushed to his field and saw Laxman Singh lying on

the ground and he was profusely bleeding from the head and had

expired. His aunt told him that she was sleeping inside the house

whereas Laxman Singh was sleeping outside. On hearing some

commotion from outside, she opened the door and saw two men

assaulting Shri Laxman Singh with lathis and other weapons. She

stepped out with a stick and on seeing her, the assailants escaped.

On the basis of this report, FIR No.379/2017 (Ex.P/34) for

the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of

the IPC was registered and investigation was commenced. The

dead body of Laxman Singh was subjected to postmortem. The

respondent No.2 Pankaj @ Pinkesh and so also the co-accused

Dileep and Ramesh were arrested. A knife and a shirt were

recovered at the instance of the accused Ramesh; iron Tammy

(3 of 4) [CRLA-56/2021]

was recovered at the instance of the accused Dileep and a lathi

was recovered at the instance of the accused Pankaj. Charge-

sheet was filed against all the three accused after concluding

investigation. The learned trial court, after appreciating the

evidence available on record, found that the weapons and the

clothes recovered at the instance of the accused Dileep and

Ramesh tested positive for presence of human blood which was

found on the shirt of the deceased and the blood stained soil

recovered from the place of the incident. First time identification

of the two accused Ramesh and Dileep by Saju Devi (PW-4) in her

sworn testimony, was considered to be reliable and acting

thereupon, these two accused were convicted whereas Pankaj,

who was apprehended in this case solely on the basis of the

recovery of the lathi on which no blood was found, was acquitted.

The complainant appellant Sohit Kumar has now approached this

Court through this appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C. seeking to

assail the acquittal of the respondent No.2 Pankaj @ Pinkesh.

4. We have heard and considered the submissions advanced by

learned counsel Shri Shambhoo Singh Rathore representing the

appellant complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor and, have

gone through the impugned Judgment as well as the record.

5. Suffice it to say, the case of prosecution as against the

respondent No.2 Pankaj is based on the sole circumstance of

recovery of lathi. As per the FIR and the testimony of the sole

eye-witness Saju Devi (PW-4), she saw two persons beating the

deceased Laxman Singh. Apparently, the prosecution has tried to

identify and impose the responsibility of the convicted accused

(4 of 4) [CRLA-56/2021]

Ramesh and Dileep as the two assailants. A subsequent theory

was portrayed in the testimony of Subhash Labana (PW-5) that

Pankaj was hiding behind the building at the time of the incident.

However, Saju Devi (PW-4) did not make any such assertion in her

evidence. It may be stated here that neither the lathi recovered at

the instance of the acquitted accused Pankaj nor the weapons

recovered at the instance of the convicted accused Dileep and

Ramesh, gave conclusive test regarding presence of a particular

blood group so as to hold that these weapons were stained with

the same blood group as that of the deceased Laxman Singh.

Apparently thus, there is no tangible evidence worth the

name of the record of the case so as to connect the respondent

Pankaj @ Pinkesh with the offences. The trial court was perfectly

justified in discarding the prosecution case and acquitting the

respondent Pankaj @ Pinkesh by the impugned Judgment.

Therefore, we find no reason to admit this victim's appeal

preferred by the appellant complainant Sohit Kumar. Hence, the

same is dismissed as being devoid of merit.

                                   (RAMESHWAR VYAS),J                                    (SANDEEP MEHTA),J


                                   26-Tikam/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)