Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jitendra @ Jitu vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:41497-Db) on 17 September, 2025
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
(1) D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 599/2014
1. Jaswant @ Jasu s/o Shri Suresh Kumar.
2. Deepak S/o Shri Rajendra Kumar.
All by caste Harijan, R/o Chhavani Sheoganj, Police Station
Sheoganj, District Sirohi.
(presently lodged in Sub Jail Abu Road, District Sirohi.)
----Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
Connected With
(2) D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 516/2014
Vikram s/o Shri Mesa Ram, by caste Harijan, Resident of
Santoshi Nagar, Chhawani, Sheoganj, P.S. Sheoganj, District
Sirohi (Rajasthan)
(presently lodged in Central Jail, Jodhpur.)
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(3) D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 560/2014
1. Chogaram s/o Roopa Ji, by caste Rebari, r/o Veraveelpur, P.S.
Paldi M., District Sirohi.
2. Narayanlal s/o Dudharam, by caste Meena, R/o P.S. Paldi M.
District Sirohi.
3. Ashok Kumar s/o Shivram, by caste Heeragar, R/o Paldi M.
District Sirohi.
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
(4) D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 600/2014
Jitendra @ Jitu s/o Roshan Lal, B/c Harizan, R/o Chhavani
Sheoganj, P.S. Sheoganj, Dist. Sirohi.
(At present lodged in Sub Jail Abu Road, Dist. Sirohi.)
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
(Downloaded on 19/09/2025 at 11:16:50 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (2 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. B.S. Rathore
Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore
Mr. Chain Singh Rathore
Mr. Shreekant Verma
Mr. Naresh Singh for
Mr. Rakesh Arora
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI
Order
17/09/2025 (Per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur)
All the aforesaid Cr. Appeals arise out of the
common judgment of conviction and sentence are being
decided by this common judgment.
The above Criminal Appeals under Section 374(2)
Cr.P.C. have been preferred by the accused-appellants (1)
Jaswant @ Jassu, (2) Deepak, (3) Vikram, (4) Chhogara,
(5) Narayan Lal, (6) Ashok Kumar and (7) Jitendra @ Jitu
against the judgment dated 19.06.2014 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Abu Road, District Sirohi
(hereinafter referred to as the learned trial court for short)
in Sessions Case No. 03/2010 - State of Rajasthan v.
Rupa Ram & Ors., whereby the accused-appellants were
convicted and sentenced for the following offences:
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (3 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
Jaswant @ Jassu under Section 147 IPC - One year simple imprisonment
Vikram and Jitendra @ with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to
Jitu further under two months SI
Under Section 452 IPC - Two years simple imprisonment
with a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to
further undergo two months SI
Under Section 323/149 IPC - Six months simple
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of
payment of fine to further undergo one month SI
Under Section 307/149 IPC - Five month simple
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of
payment of fine to further undergo three month SI
Under Section 302/149 IPC - Life imprisonment with a fine
of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further
undergo six month SI
Under Section 363/149 IPC - three years simple
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of
payment of fine to further undergo three month SI
Under Section 368/149 IPC - three years simple
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of
payment of fine to further undergo three month SI
Chhoga Ram, Narayan LalUnder Section 363/120 IPC - three years simple
and Ashok Kumar imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of
payment of fine to further undergo 1 month SI
At the outset, learned Public Prosecutor submits that as
per the information supplied to him, accused-appellant No.2
Narayan Lal in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 560/2014 as well as
Jawant @ Jasu accused-appellant No.1 in D.B. Cr. Appeal
No.599/2014 have passed away during pendency of the appeal.
In view of the above, the appeals preferred by the
accused-appellants Naryan Lal and Jaswant @ Jasu stand abated.
Brief facts necessary for deciding the controversy are
that on the basis of parcha bayan (Ex.P/52) of Smt. Teejo W/
o Jivaji Jeevan, recorded by Shri Heera Ram, S.I., P.S.
Pindwara at Government Hospital, Pindwara on 17.09.2009,
FIR No.245/2009 was registered for offences punishable
under Sections 143, 307, 452, 323, 363 and 366/149 IPC.
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (4 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
As per the parcha bayan, Smt. Teejo was married to
accused Rupa Ram about 15 years earlier and out of their
wedlock two children, namely Peera (aged 11 years) and
Kaniya (aged 9 years), were born. After residing with her
husband for about 9-10 years, she was subjected to cruelty,
whereafter she returned to her parental house at Nandiya
and subsequently obtained divorce from Rupa Ram.
Thereafter, she entered into a Nata marriage with Jeeva Ram
S/o Bhuta Ji, R/o Batakara, and out of this wedlock a
daughter, Dimple (aged 2 years), was born. On account of the
divorce, accused Rupa Ram was bearing enmity with her.
On the intervening night of 16.09.2009, at about
12.30-1.00 a.m., while Smt. Teejo was sleeping in her house
at Nandiya along with her children, Peera, Kaniya and Dimple,
her father Devaji and mother Rabi were also sleeping there.
At that time, accused Rupa Ram, accompanied by 3-4
unknown persons, entered the house and started beating her
with lathis. When her parents intervened, the accused
assaulted them also. As a result, Smt. Teejo, her father and
mother became unconscious, and in the meantime, the
accused persons abducted her daughters Kaniya and Dimple
in a white car. On hearing hue and cry, Natharam reached the
spot, but the accused fled away. In the incident, Smt. Teejo
sustained injuries on her left leg and back, and her parents
also received multiple injuries. During treatment, both Rabi
and Devaji succumbed to the injuries and, accordingly,
offence under Section 302 IPC was added.
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (5 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
On the basis of the aforesaid parcha bayan, a formal
FIR No.245/2009 was registered at Police Station Pindwara
against the accused for offences punishable under Sections
143, 307, 452, 323, 363 and 366/149 IPC.
After completion of investigation, police filed a charge-
sheet against accused Rupa Ram for offences punishable
under Sections 147, 302, 452, 323, 363, 368 and 307 IPC;
against co-accused Maga Ram, Jitendra, Jaswant, Deepak,
Vikram and Lalit Raj for offences under Sections 147, 302,
452, 307, 323, 363/149 IPC; and against co-accused Chhoga
Ram, Narain Lal and Ashok Kumar for offences under
Sections 147, 302, 452, 307, 323, 363 and 120-B/149 IPC.
Thereafter, the learned trial Court framed, read over
and explained the charges against accused Rupa Ram for
offences punishable under Sections 452, 147, 323/149, 302,
307, 363 and 368 IPC; against accused Chhoga Ram, Ashok
Kumar and Narain for offences punishable under Sections
452, 147, 323/149, 302/149, 307/149, 363/149 and 120-B
IPC; and against accused Bhaga Ram, Jitendra Kumar,
Jaswant, Deepak, Vikram and Lalit Raj for offences
punishable under Sections 452, 147, 323/149, 302/149,
307/149 and 363/149 IPC. The accused denied the charges
and claimed to be tried.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined
28 witnesses and exhibited 110 documents, while in defence,
four documents were exhibited.
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (6 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
The statements of the accused-appellants were
recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied all
incriminating circumstances put to them, stating that the
prosecution witnesses had deposed falsely, that the evidence
was fabricated, and that they were innocent. The accused-
appellants did not lead any defence evidence, and the
defence evidence was accordingly closed.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there
are three important witnesses in this case, namely Smt. Teejo
Devi (PW-11), the complainant, and her children Kanya (PW-
14) and Poora Ram @ Peera (PW-15). However, in their
depositions, nothing incriminating has come against the
present appellants. The statement of these witnesses is
consistent on the point that the aggressor, who made
assaults were Rupa Ram, Maga Ram and Lalit and they had
not identified the appellants. Smt. Teejo Devi (PW-11) did not
identify appellants Deepak and Jaswant in Court and further
stated that the persons who were standing outside the house
were not known to her. She categorically deposed that only
three persons, namely Rupa Ram, Maga Ram and Lalit,
entered the house and assaulted her parents, whereas there
is no allegation that the persons who were standing outside
the house had entered inside and participated in the assault.
When these three material eye-witnesses have not deposed
anything against the appellants, the finding of guilt recorded
by the learned trial Court against them is wholly unjustified.
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (7 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
Learned counsel further submits that as per the
prosecution case, lathis were allegedly recovered from the
appellants. However, the recovery witnesses Jora Ram (PW-2)
and Thana Ram (PW-3) have not supported the prosecution
case and turned hostile. Even the Investigating Officer,
Kishan Singh (PW-22), admitted in his statement that no
bloodstains were found on the lathis said to have been
recovered from the appellants, and therefore, the same were
not sent for FSL examination. In these circumstances, the
alleged recovery of lathis cannot form the basis of conviction
of the appellants.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that even
as per the statements of the PW-11 Teejo Devi the present
appellants have not been identified. Further, no overt act has
been attributed to the present appellants. He further submits
that the present appellants were told to accompany with
Rupa Ram, but the purpose and intention were not known to
them. They did not enter into the house of Teejo Devi and
when the present appellants saw some scuffle, hue & cry,
they left the place of occurrence. Learned counsel therefore,
submits that the learned trial court has committed an error in
convicting the appellants vide the judgment dated 19.6.2014.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions
made by learned counsel for the appellants and has
supported the findings recorded by the learned trial court
while convicting the appellants in the present case.
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (8 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
We have considered the submissions made before this
Court and have minutely gone through the record of the trial
court.
Smt. Teejo Devi was married to Rupa Ram and from
the wedlock, they had two children namely, Kaniya and Peera
Ram @ Pura Ram. On account of marital discord, Smt. Teejo
Devi left the matrimonial home and started living at Nadiya
where she entered into Nata marriage with Jeeva Ram and
from that Nata marriage, she had one daughter namely,
Dimple. Since Rupa Ram was keeping an enmity with Smt.
Teejo Devi, he alongwith other accused persons went to the
house of Teejo Devi at around mid night and assaulted Teejo
Devi and her parents - Deva Ji and Rabi. In the incident,
PW-11 Smt. Teejo Devi, who is also an injured eye witness
stated that Rupa Ram, Maga Ram and Lalit came to the house
of Smt. Teejo Devi and assaulted her and her parents with
Lathis resulting into number of injuries having been suffered
by her father and mother. She further stated that after badly
assaulting them, Rupa Ram took away Dimple and Maga Ram
took away Kaniya. Thereafter, on the next day, the injured
mother and father were taken to the hospital and during
journey to Abu Road, her mother passed away and her father
passed away in hospital at Abu Road. Thereafter, their post-
mortem was conducted at Pindwara Hospital and her
statement was also recorded at Pindwara Hospital. In the
statement, she stated that there were other persons, who
were standing outside the house, but she was not knowing to
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (9 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
them. Nothing contrary has come on record in her cross-
examination.
On the similar lines, PW-14 Kaniya, who is daughter of
Rupa Ram and Teejo Devi, has stated that her father Rupa
Ram, uncle Maga Ram and Lalit assaulted her grand-parents
(Nana Nani) resulting into their death.
PW-15 Peera Ram @ Pura Ram, who is the son of
Rupa Ram and Teejo Devi has deposed on the similar lines of
PW-11 Teejo Devi and PW-14 Kaniya. Nothing contrary has
been stated by PW-14 Kaniya and PW-15 Peera Ram in their
cross-examination to the statement given by them in
examination-in-chief.
In the statement of Investigating Officer PW-22 Kishan
Singh it has come on record that the present appellants were
the taxi driver/driver of the vehicles and were present outside
the house and their presence were also disclosed by Rupa
Ram in the interrogation note.
The post-mortem as well as the injury reports of
Devaji and Rabi corroborates the statements of PW-11 Teejo
Devi, PW-14 Kaniya and PW-15 Peera Ram @ Pura Ram.
A conjoint reading of the statements of three eye
witnesses shows that the the present appellants were neither
named in the statements recorded before the learned trial
court nor they were named in the statements recorded by the
police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. We further noted that
although in the statements before the learned trial court, the
PW-11 Teejo Devi, PW-14 Kaniya and PW-15 Peera Ram @
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41497-DB] (10 of 10) [CRLA-599/2014]
Pura Ram have named only three persons - Rupa Ram,
Magha Ram and Lalit. As far as the identification of Rupa Ram
is concerned, the same cannot be doubted by the three
witnesses as he was husband of Teejo Devi and father of
Kaniya and Peera Ram@ Pura Ram and, therefore, the
evidence, which has come on record in the shape of PW-11
Teejo Devi, PW-14 Kaniya and PW-15 Peera Ram @ Pura Ram
clearly establishes the fact that there was no involvement of
the present appellants in the incident and no overt act has
been attributed to them. Further, the statements are
corroborated by the injury and post-mortem reports. Even
the Investigating Officer has also fortified the statements of
above three witnesses.
In view of the discussion made above, the criminal
appeals are allowed. The judgment of conviction and
sentence dated 19.6.2014 passed by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Abu Road, District Sirohi in Sessions Case
No.3/2010 qua the accused appellants (1) Deepak, (2)
Vikram, (3) Chhogara, (4) Ashok Kumar and (5) Jitendra @
Jitu is quashed and set aside. The accused-appellants (1)
Deepak, (2) Vikram, (3) Chhogara, (4) Ashok Kumar and (5)
Jitendra @ Jitu are acquitted from the charges levelled
against them and they ordered to be released forthwith, if not
needed in any other case.
(ANUROOP SINGHI),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
38-41-Kartik Dave/C.P. Goyal/Payal/-
(Uploaded on 19/09/2025 at 03:08:24 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
