Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Om Prakash @ Sharwan Kumar vs State on 12 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLR-355/2000]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 355/2000
Ram Chandra Gupta
----Petitioner
Versus
State And Anr
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 410/2000
Om Prakash @ Sharwan Kumar
----Petitioner
Versus
State
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 640/2000
State
----Petitioner
Versus
Omprakash Alias Shriwan Kumar
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abheshek Bohra for
Mr. D.N. Yadav
For Respondent(s) : Mr. MS Bhati, PP
Mr. P.S. Balot
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
12/04/2022
In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its
highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being
maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety
of all concerned.
These three matters i.e. CRL.R No.355/2000 (against
acquittal of accused-respondent Om Prakash @ Sharvan Kumar for
offence under Section 304 IPC); CRL.A No.410/2000 (has been
filed against conviction of Om Prakash @ Sharvan Kumar for
(Downloaded on 13/04/2022 at 08:35:37 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-355/2000]
offence under Section 404 IPC) and CRL.A No.640/2000 (has
been filed for conviction of Om Prakash @ Sharvan Kumar only U/
s.404 IPC and acquittal under Section 304 IPC) have been filed
against common the impugned judgment dated 24.06.2000.
The brief facts of case are that the complainant Ram
Chandra Gupta submitted a report on 15.02.1999 at P.S.
Chopasani Housing Board, Jodhpur alleging inter alia that his wife
i.e. Smt. Trupti, who is working as Nurse in hospital at Chachalwa,
Tehsil Shergarh went on duty on 09.02.1999 but did not return
back home. Upon search, when she could not be recovered police
registered case bearing no.42 under sections 306, 350 IPC and
the investigation commenced.
During the course of investigation challan was filed against
accused under Section 304 and 404 IPC. During trial, prosecution
examined as many as 16 witnesses and got exhibited 21
documents.
The deposition of PW-3 Ramanlal was crucial. He deposed
that the deceased-lady was brought in a very serious state of
illness at Sagwara hospital and she expired during treatment. The
others have also deposed that the cause of death was illness of
the lady. The post-mortem also indicated laparoscopic surgery
upon the body but clear post-mortem report was not there. PW-13
Ram Chandra Gupta, who is husband of deceased, deposed that
Sarwan has enticed away his wife for the purpose of marriage, for
which he lodged a report at Police Station, which is Exhibit-P/17,
as he was aware about her illicit relationship.
(Downloaded on 13/04/2022 at 08:35:37 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-355/2000]
Learned PP submits that recovery of the ornaments was
made out.
This Court on carefully examining the material available on
record and the judgment impugned is of the opinion that the trial
court has rightly arrived at a conclusion that it is not a case of
Section 304 IPC as it has not been proved beyond reasonable
doubt and because of recovery of ornaments offence Section 404
IPC stands established. The post-mortem report alongwith the
deposition of PW-13, husband of deceased and other witnesses
clearly points out that the cause of death was not proved beyond
reasonable doubt, although, recovery of ornaments is established
under Section 404 IPC.
Accordingly, the CRL.R. No.355/2000 and CRL.A.
No.640/2000 are dismissed.
CRL.A No.410/2000 is allowed while maintaining the
appellant's conviction under Section 404 IPC, as above, the
sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already
undergone by him. The appellant is on bail. He need not to
surrender. His bail-bonds are discharged accordingly.
All pending applications stand disposed of. Record of the
learned court below be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
63-65 nirmala/Sanjay-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
