Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suwalal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20208) on 23 April, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:20208]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1794/2024
Suwalal S/o Shri Latulal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Surer P.s.
Rajgarh, Dist. Alwar
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp, Jodhpur
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Chiranji Lal Mali
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, Dy.G.A.
Mr. Ravindra Singh AGA
Mr. Shankar Lal Dy.S.P
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Judgment
Reportable
23/04/2025
1.The present appeal is directed against the order dated 31-01-
2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities Act Cases), Jalore, whereby the learned trial court
declined the appellant's request for further investigation in the
matter.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, examined
the case diary, and conferred with the investigating officer, this
Court has also closely analyzed the post-mortem report and
relevant records, including references in Modi's Medical
Jurisprudence regarding hanging and strangulation.
2.1 Although there is presently no direct evidence pointing
towards the culpability of any specific accused, significant
suspicious circumstances raise legitimate concerns. The coloured
[2025:RJ-JD:20208] (2 of 5) [CRLAS-1794/2024]
photographs attached to the case diary do not convincingly
suggest a case of suicidal hanging. The marks on the neck of the
deceased are inconsistent with the typical features seen in suicidal
hanging. While this Court does not claim to override the findings
of the medical experts, it must be emphasized that its
observations should be considered as expressing judicial doubt.
2.2 Importantly, the post-mortem report, prepared by a duly
constituted medical board, indicates that saliva was not found
dribbling from the mouth--a common symptom in cases of
hanging. In hanging, the tilted position of the neck usually causes
saliva to drip onto the chin and chest. This symptom was absent in
the present case.
To provide clarity on the medico-legal differences between hanging
and strangulation , a comparative table is set out below-
Hanging Strangulation
1. Mostly suicidal. 1. Mostly homicidal
2. Ligature mark, oblique, non- 2. Ligature mark, horizontal or
continuous, placed high up in the transverse, continuous, round the
neck between the chin and the larynx, neck, low down in the neck below the
the base of the groove or furrow thyroid, the base of the groove or
being hard, yellow and parchment- furrow being soft and reddish.
like.
3. Abrasions and ecchymoses round 3. Abrasions and ecchymoses round
about the edges of the ligature mark, about the edges of the ligature mark,
rare. common.
4. Subcutaneous tissues under the 4. Subcutaneous tissues under the
mark, white, hard, and glistening. mark, ecchymosed.
5. Injury to the muscles of the neck, 5. Injury to the muscles of the neck,
rare. common.
[2025:RJ-JD:20208] (3 of 5) [CRLAS-1794/2024]
6. Carotid arteries, internal coats 6. Carotid arteries, internal coats
ruptured in violent cases of a long ordinarily ruptured
drop.
7. Fracture of the larynx and trachea, 7. Fracture of the larynx and trachea,
very rare and that too in judicial often found, also hyoid bone.
hanging.
8. Fracture-dislocation of the cervical 8. Fracture-dislocation of the cervical
vertebræ, common in judicial vertebræ, rare.
hanging.
9. Scratches, abrasions and bruises 9. Scratches, abrasions and bruises on
on the face, neck and other parts of the face, neck and other parts of the
the body, usually not present. body, usually present.
10.Face, usually pale and no 10. Face, congested, livid and marked
petechiæ. with petechiæ.
11. Neck, stretched and elongated in 11. Neck, not so.
fresh bodies.
12. External signs of asphyxia, usually 12. External signs of asphyxia, very
not well marked well marked (minimal if death due to
vaso-vagal effect).
13.Bleeding from the nose, mouth 13. Bleeding from the nose, mouth
and ears, very rare. and ears, may be found.
14. Saliva, running out of the mouth 14. Saliva, no such running.
down on the chin and chest.
15.Emphysematous patches on the 15.Emphysematous patches on the
surface of the lungs, not presesnt. sur-face of the lungs, may be present.
2.3 The medical board clearly opined that the cause of death was
asphyxia due to strangulation. Why the police officers are
adamant to show that it is a case of hanging is a further question
to ponder. How the opinion of a duly constituted board of three
doctors, who personally examined the body of the deceased and
conducted the autopsy, could be disregarded is another point
requiring deliberation. It may be that sufficient material has not
been collected regarding the culpability of any accused; however,
[2025:RJ-JD:20208] (4 of 5) [CRLAS-1794/2024]
that cannot be a valid ground for altering the mode of death. If it
is a case of strangulation, it could not have been self-inflicted, and
in the ordinary course of nature, a presumption would arise that
the deceased was strangulated by someone. This involves the
death of a poor person. The prayer for further investigation by an
expert body ought not to have been declined by the learned trial
Judge.
3. Despite this, the investigating agency appears insistent on
treating the death as a case of hanging, which raises serious
concerns about the objectivity of the investigation.
4. It is troubling that the opinion of a duly constituted medical
board of three doctors, who personally conducted the autopsy, has
not been given due weight. While it may be true that sufficient
evidence has not yet been gathered against any accused, this
cannot justify reclassifying the mode of death.
5. If the death was caused by strangulation, it is highly unlikely to
have been self-inflicted, and under normal circumstances, a
presumption of homicide would arise.
6. This is a case concerning the unnatural death of a poor person,
and justice demands a fair and thorough investigation. The trial
court erred in declining the request for further investigation,
especially when strong suspicious circumstances had been brought
to its notice.
7.At the stage of considering a protest petition or an application
for further investigation, the court is not required to conduct a
detailed evaluation of the evidence. When serious doubts or
[2025:RJ-JD:20208] (5 of 5) [CRLAS-1794/2024]
suspicious circumstances are raised, it is both appropriate and
necessary to allow further investigation.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
31-01-2024 is hereby set aside. The trial court is directed as
under:
• Return the case diary to the SHO of the concerned police
station.
• The Superintendent of Police (SP) of the district shall forward
the file to the Inspector General (IG) of the Range.
• The IG shall appoint a police officer not below the rank of
Additional Superintendent of Police (Addl. SP) to conduct
further investigation into the matter.
9. Upon completion of the further investigation, the investigating
officer shall file the result before the competent court.
(FARJAND ALI),J
38-Mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
