Jagdish vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 11740 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1407/2017

Jagdish S/o Hukam Chand Yadav, Lanka Colony, Rawan Chowk

P.S. Kotwali Bara At Present Rasadpura, P.S. Bijoliya. At Present

In Jail Bhilwara.

----Appellant Versus The State Of Rajasthan.

                                                                 ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Vishal Sharma

For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI


                                    Order

21/09/2022

The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as

below vide judgment dated 12.07.2017 passed by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bhilwara in Sessions Case

No.09/2015:-

Offences       Sentences                 Fine                   Fine   Default
                                                                Sentences
302 IPC        Life Imprisonment Rs.5,000/-                     3         months'
                                                                additional Simple
                                                                Imprisonment

He has filed the instant appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC

for assailing the impugned Judgment.

(2 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal

are noted hereinbelow:-

The appellant was married to Smt. Krishna about 7-8 years

before the incident. He used to quarrel with his wife and thus, for

the last two months, she was living at her father's house. The

appellant also came down to the parental home of Smt. Krishna

about one month before the incident which took place on

27.05.2015. The prosecution has claimed that the appellant herein

forcibly took Smt. Krishna into the bathroom of the house and

throttled her neck. When Smt. Krishna became unconscious, he

ran away. The children told Krishna's mother about the incident on

which, she informed Deepak, brother of Smt. Krishna who came

home from his work. A car was engaged and Smt. Krishna was

taken to the Bijolia Hospital from where she was referred to Kota

on account of her precarious condition. On the way, Smt. Krishna

expired whereupon, her body was taken to the Bijolia Hospital.

Shri Deepak (P.W.1), lodged a written report (Ex.P/1) with these

allegations and casting aspersions that the appellant herein, had

throttled and killed Smt. Krishna. Marks of violence were visible on

her neck.

On the basis of this report, formal FIR No.138/2015 (Ex.P/8),

came to be registered at the Police Station, Bijolia for the offence

punishable under Section 302 IPC. Investigation of the case was

assigned to Shri Suryabhan Singh (P.W.11), posted as the SHO,

Bijolia who proceeded to conduct investigation. The accused

appellant was arrested. Various spot documents were prepared.

(3 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

The dead body of Smt. Krishna was subjected to autopsy by

a Medical Board constituted at the CHC, Bijolia. Dr. Lokesh

Dhakkad (P.W.10) alongwith Dr. Ansar Khan (P.W.12), carried out

the autopsy upon the dead body of Smt. Krishna at the CHC,

Bijolia and took note of the following injuries:-

(i) The wind pipe was swollen.

(ii) Laryngeal bone was fractured.

(iii) Contusions were visible at three places on the neck.

(iv) When the external injuries were opened, it was noticed that

blood had effused inside the tissues and blood clots were visible

thereupon.

(v) Horn of the hyoid bone was fractured.

The Medical Board opined that the cause of death of Smt.

Krishna was asphyxia as a result of compression of neck.

Postmortem Report (Ex.P/7) was issued with these conclusions.

After concluding investigation, a charge-sheet came to be

filed against the accused appellant in the Court concerned for the

offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. As the offence was

exclusively sessions triable, the case was committed to the court

of Sessions Judge, Bhilwara from where it was transferred to the

Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bhilwara for trial. Charge

was framed against the accused appellant for the offence

punishable under Section 302 IPC. He pleaded not guilty and

claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses

and exhibited 12 documents to prove its case. The accused upon

being questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was confronted with

the circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence which he

(4 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

denied. He claimed not to be present at the spot when the

incident took place but no oral evidence was led in defence.

After hearing the arguments advanced by the learned Public

Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel and appreciating the

evidence available on record, the learned trial court proceeded to

convict and sentence the appellant as above by the impugned

judgment dated 12.07.2017, which is assailed in this appeal.

Shri Vishal Sharma, learned counsel representing the

appellant vehemently and fervently contended that the entire

prosecution case is false and fabricated. No motive to commit the

offence has been proved by the prosecution, Evidence of the

material prosecution witnesses regarding the accused appellant

having strangled/throttled Smt. Krishna, leading to her homicidal

death, is false and fabricated. The first informant Deepak (P.W.1),

was admittedly not present at the scene of occurrence when the

incident took place. Conduct of the so called eye-witnesses Shri

Kiran (P.W.3), brother of the deceased, Smt. Sugna Devi (P.W.4),

sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the deceased and Smt. Sarju Devi

(P.W.7), mother of the deceased, is suspicious. These witnesses

who were close relatives of the deceased, made no attempt

whatsoever to save her from the clutches of the accused when he

was allegedly trying to strangulate her.

On these grounds, learned defence counsel, implored the

Court to accept the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and

acquit the accused appellant from the charge.

(5 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, vehemently and

fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's

counsel. He drew the Court's attention to the statements of the

material prosecution witnesses viz. Kiran (P.W.3), younger brother

of the deceased, Sugna Devi (P.W.4), sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the

deceased and Sarju Devi (P.W.7), mother of the deceased, all of

whom, gave categoric evidence to the effect that the accused

herein was staying with Smt. Krishna at the parental house of the

deceased from a month before the incident. He used to quarrel

with Smt. Krishna and was casting aspersions on her character. On

the fateful day, the accused appellant Jagdish Yadav, started

fighting with Smt. Krishna and was heard making insinuations that

she was of easy virtue and had an illicit relation with someone.

Smt. Krishna had gone towards the bathroom for washing the

utensils. The witnesses heard her subdued cries on which, they

went to the said direction and saw that Jagdish was pressing the

neck of Smt. Krishna, who was lying down. Smt. Surja Devi

(P.W.7), raised hue and cry and tried to save the victim from the

clutches of the accused. Smt. Krishna had lost senses by that

time. Her neck got swollen. Jagdish ran away from the place of

incident. Smt. Krishna was taken to the Bijolia Hospital from

where, the doctor referred her to Kota because of her precarious

condition. While Smt. Krishna was being taken to Kota, she passed

away. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that nothing was

elicited in the cross examination conducted from any of these

three material prosecution witnesses, which can discredit their

evidentiary worth. He submitted that in the statement under

Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused had admitted the fact that he was

staying with Smt. Krishna in the house of her father on the date of

(6 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

the incident. A bald plea was taken by the accused that he had

gone to do his labour job at the time of incident but this plea was

not backed up by any reliable evidence.

Learned Public Prosecutor also referred to the statements of

the two Medical Jurists Dr. Lokesh Dhakkad (P.W.10) and Dr. Ansar

Khan (P.W.12), who conducted autopsy upon the dead body of

Smt. Krishna and issued the Postmortem Report (Ex.P/7) wherein,

a clear conclusion is recorded that Smt. Krishna died as a result of

asphyxia caused by compression of neck. Learned Public

Prosecutor submitted that the evidence of the witnesses referred

to supra, clearly establishes the culpability of the accused for the

crime and hence, the trial court was perfectly justified in

convicting and sentencing the appellant as above.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the

submissions advanced at bar and have meticulously reappreciated

the evidence available on record.

The witnesses Deepak Yadav (P.W.1), Ashok Kumar (P.W.2)

and Kiran (P.W.3), brothers of the deceased, Sugna Devi (P.W.4),

sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the deceased and Sarju Devi (P.W.7),

mother of the deceased, gave categoric evidence to the effect that

the marital strife was going on between Jagdish (accused

appellant) and Smt. Krishna (deceased), who were married to

each other about 7-8 years back. Jagdish used to caste aspersions

on the character of Smt. Krishna. Resultantly, Smt. Krishna

(deceased) started living at her parental home from about two

months before the incident. Jagdish also came and started living

(7 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

there about one month before the incident. He used to go to his

labour job from the house of the father of Smt. Krishna

(deceased).

The incident took place on 27.05.2015 at about 10.15 AM.

Deepak (P.W.1) and Ashok Kumar (P.W.2) had gone to their

respective labour jobs. Kiran, the ladies and the children were

present at the house. A call was put to Deepak by his mother, who

informed him that his brother-in-law (the accused appellant) had

pressed the neck of his sister (Smt. Krishna) and ran away.

Deepak and Ashok, immediately rushed home where, they met

the family members referred to supra, who divulged the entire

details of the incident whereafter, Smt. Krishna was taken to

Bijolia Hospital where, she was examined for her injuries. The

Injury Report (Ex.P/12), was issued taking note of three

contusions on her neck area. The condition of Smt. Krishna was

precarious at that time and thus, she was referred to higher

centre i.e. Kota but expired on the way.

We have carefully and thoroughly scrutinized evidence of the

eye-witnesses Shri Kiran (P.W.3), Smt. Sugna Devi (P.W.4) and

Smt. Surja Devi (P.W.7). All of these witnesses affirmed the fact

that the accused appellant used to frequently quarrel with his

wife, the deceased Smt. Krishna. On the day of the incident, the

accused and Smt. Krishna were present in the house and were

taking food. At that time, they started quarreling with each other

and Jagdish was heard hurling insinuations of

immorality/promiscuity towards his wife Smt. Krishna. She went

towards the bathroom for washing the utensils. Jagdish followed

(8 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

her and was trying to press her neck. On hearing some sounds,

Surja Devi rushed to the said direction and saw that Jagdish was

pressing the neck of Smt. Krishna. On seeing Surja Devi, the

accused Jagdish fled away. All the three witnesses supra, took out

Smt. Krishna from the bathroom and checked her on which, they

found that her neck was swollen.

General cross-examination was conducted from the

witnesses to create a doubt on their presence at the time of

incident and to question their veracity. However, we are of the firm

view that presence of the three witnesses in the house at the time

of incident, cannot be doubted. The witnesses Shri Kiran (P.W.3)

and Sugna Devi (P.W.4), admitted in cross-examination that they

also used to do labour jobs but they gave logical explanation as to

why they had not gone to their respective jobs on the date of

incident. Surja Devi (P.W.7) was a housewife and no suggestion

was given by the defence counsel to this witness regarding she

not being present at the spot when the incident took place.

On an overall appreciation of the evidence of the three

witnesses referred to supra, we feel that the version of the

witness Surja Devi (P.W.7) wherein, she stated that she heard the

subdued cries of Smt. Krishna from the bathroom and on going to

the said direction, she saw that Jagdish was pressing her neck, is

absolutely unimpeachable. There was no such motive, which could

have instigated the witness to falsely implicate the accused

Jagdish for the murder of Smt. Krishna.

(9 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

Thus, we are convinced, that evidence of the witness Surja

Devi (P.W.7), is convincing on the aspect that she heard the

sounds coming from towards the bathroom and on going towards

the said direction, she saw the appellant forcibly pressing the neck

of Smt. Krishna. On noticing the present of the witness, the

accused fled away. The witnesses Shri Kiran (P.W.3) and Smt.

Sugna Devi (P.W.4), also reached the spot shortly after Smt. Surja

Devi (P.W.7) and all took out the victim, whose neck was swollen.

The fact that Smt. Krishna was taken to the Bijolia Hospital in an

injured condition, is fortified from the Injury Report (Ex.P/12).

Later on, she was referred to Kota for better management, but

expired on the way. The evidence of the Medical Jurists Dr. Lokesh

Dhakkad (P.W.10) and Dr. Ansar Khan (P.W.12), is convincing on

the aspect that Smt. Krishna died by asphyxia caused by

compression of neck, which is death by violent means. The

injuries caused to Smt. Krishna by compression of neck as

attributed to the appellant were sufficient in the ordinary course of

nature to cause death.

Thus, the allegation constituting necessary ingredients of

crime are proved against the accused appellant beyond every

shadow of reasonable doubt. The learned trial court appreciated

the evidence available on record in an apropos and diligent

manner. The evidence available on record is indicative exclusively

towards the guilt of the accused and calls for no other

interpretation. The impugned judgment dated 12.07.2017, does

not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference.

(10 of 10) [CRLA-1407/2017]

As a consequence, we find no merit in this appeal which is

dismissed as such.

Record be returned to the trial court.

                                   (FARJAND ALI),J                                         (SANDEEP MEHTA),J


                                   34-/Devesh/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)