[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rakesh vs State Of Rajasthan on 31 January, 2026
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
(1) D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 582/2025
and
(2) D.B. Criminal Appeal No.110/2025
Rakesh S/o Badri Lal Chamar, Aged About 24 Years, R/o
Chandgarh P.s. Badilyas, Dist. Bhilwara (Lodged In Central Jail,
Chittorgarh)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Manju Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sharwan Singh Rathore, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA
Judgment
BY THE COURT: (Per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur)
1. Date of conclusion of argument 22.01.2026
2. Date on which the judgment was 22.01.2026
reserved
3. Whether the full judgment or only Full Judgment
operative part is pronounced
4. Date of Pronouncement 31.01.2026
1. Although the matter was listed on the application for
suspension of sentence, however, with the consent of the parties,
the appeal itself was heard on merit and the same was ordered to
be reserved.
2. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred under section
374(2) Cr.P.C by the accused-appellant Rakesh S/o Shri Badri lal
Chamar, against the judgment dated 07.08.2024 passed by
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (2 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
learned District and Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, in Sessions Case
No. 91/2022 (CIS No.167/2022), whereby, the accused-appellant
stands convicted for the offence under Section 302 and 455 of the
IPC and sentenced as under:-.
302 Life imprisonment with a Fine In default of payment of
IPC of Rs.25,000/- fine to further undergo
six months SI
455 10 years simple In default of payment of
IPC imprisonment with a Fine of fine to further undergo
Rs.10,000/- three months SI
3. As per the prosecution case, a report was lodged by
complainant-Ambalal (PW-2) stating therein that on 26.07.2022,
at about 1:30 PM, complainant Ambalal returned to home from
the school along with his child. His mother, Smt. Chandi Bai,
resided in an adjacent room of the same premises. After dropping
the child in the house, he went to his mother's room to fetch a
basket for feeding the cow. Although, the mother usually kept the
door open during daytime, however, on that day the door was
found half-closed. Upon opening it, the complainant saw a young
man wearing a red shirt assaulting his mother with an axe, having
already amputated both of her legs and attempting to remove her
silver anklets. The assailant pushed the complainant aside and, in
the ensuing panic, fled from the spot, leaving the anklets behind
in the room. The complainant entered the room and found his
mother lying dead, both legs amputated, and her throat also
found slit and tied with a rope. He immediately chased the
assailant, but he escaped into the adjoining street. The
complainant asserted that he would be able to identify the
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (3 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
perpetrator upon seeing him. At that time, his uncle's daughter,
Ranu Salvi, also reached at the place of occurrence. According to
the complainant, the assailant had killed Smt. Chandi Bai in the
course of robbing the silver ornaments, worn by her.
4. On the basis of the above report, a formal FIR No.308/22
(Ex.P-05) was registered at Police Station Chittorgarh against the
accused-appellant for the offences under Sections 302 and 455
IPC.
5. After completion of investigation, Police filed a charge-sheet
against the accused-appellant for the offences under section 302,
455 and 326 IPC.
6. Learned Trial Court framed, read over and explained the
charges under Sections 302, 455 and 326 IPC to the accused-
appellant, who denied the charge and sought trial.
7. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 17
witnesses. In support of its case, the prosecution also produced
documentary evidence, Exhibits P-01 to P-43.
8. Accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C.,
during which he stated that the prosecution witnesses were
deposing falsely and given false evidence. In his defence, the
accused-appellant did not produce any documents and evidence.
9. Learned Trial Court, after hearing the arguments advanced
on behalf of both sides and upon appreciation of the oral and
documentary evidence brought on record, convicted and
sentenced the accused-appellant as aforesaid vide judgment dated
07.08.2024. Hence the present appeal.
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (4 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
10. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
learned trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence on record in
its correct perspective. There existed material contradictions,
manipulations, and irregularities in the testimonies of
prosecution witnesses; however, despite these glaring
infirmities, the Trial Court proceeded to convict the accused-
appellant, rendering the impugned judgment unsustainable in
the eye of law.
11. She further submitted that there is no evidence
whatsoever to show that the appellant committed the alleged
offences, and the prosecution story is riddled with
inconsistencies. The appellant was not present at the place of
occurrence, and the complainant (PW-02) himself admitted that
he saw one person only for a moment. Such doubtful and
uncorroborated identification required careful scrutiny along
with other material evidence.
12. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant has
no connection with the alleged incident. He is not named in the
FIR, there are no eyewitnesses of the occurrence, and all
prosecution witnesses are hearsay. It is argued that neither
appellant committed murder by trespassing into the
complainant's house, nor did he amputate the legs of the
deceased with an axe in order to steal her silver anklets.
Learned counsel further submitted that prosecution failed to
prove that the alleged pliers purchased from the shop of PW-01
Tahir Bohra was used for commission of crime by the appellant
and the statement of this witness is untrustworthy,
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (5 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
unsupported by documentary proof, and therefore inadmissible.
The CCTV footage relied upon by the prosecution also does not
identify the appellant or place him at the scene of occurrence.
13. It is further argued that the identification of the appellant
by the PW-01 Tahir Bohra, complainant Ambalal (PW-02) and
Naina @ Ranu (PW-03) is wholly unsafe, as all of them
identified the accused only after he was shown to them at the
police station when he was arrested. Such dock identification,
influenced by police presence, cannot establish guilt. It is
therefore submitted that the identification does not prove that
the appellant committed the murder by severing the legs of the
deceased with an axe.
14. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that the
appellant did not provide any disclosure or verification leading
to the recovery of any article from the place of occurrence. The
investigating officer alone inspected the scene, including the
bathroom, and there was no discovery attributable to the
accused-appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
15. Further, it is submitted that the prosecution's reliance on
the statement of PW-03, Naina @ Ranu, is wholly misplaced, as
she is a relative of the complainant and admitted in cross-
examination that she had not witnessed the incident and only
saw the appellant briefly on the public road. The Trial Court,
however, accepted her statement without testing its reliability,
contrary to settled principles of criminal jurisprudence.
16. Regarding the alleged recovery of silver anklets, it is
submitted that even the complainant admitted in the FIR that
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (6 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
the articles were found lying in his own house and not in the
possession of the appellant. Similarly, the alleged recovery of
the axe, iron rod and iron pliers is not proved, as the
prosecution failed to establish exclusive possession, and PW-
01's claim that the tools were sold to the appellant is
uncorroborated and inherently unreliable.
17. Learned counsel further argued that no call detail records
or mobile location of the appellant were produced to establish
his presence near the scene of occurrence. The appellant was
arrested merely from a nearby locality on suspicion. Serious
discrepancies also exist regarding the timing of death. The post
mortem was conducted at 05:00 PM the post mortem report
(Ex. P-27), mentions the duration of death between 2-6 hours,
which contradicts the prosecution timeline, but the learned
Court below ignored this material contradiction.
18. It is further submitted that the prosecution case is based
on an alleged extra-judicial confession which is neither proved
nor corroborated. Since the appellant has not made any such
confession, therefore, the reliance made on unsubstantiated
oral assertions is impermissible in law. The record of the
Investigating Officer itself fails to support the complainant's
story.
19. Learned Counsel submitted that in absence of a certificate
under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, call detail evidence, if
any, cannot be relied upon. It is also argued that the
prosecution has failed to establish any motive. She further
contended that it is admitted that the appellant had no prior
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (7 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
grudge against the deceased, and in a case based purely on
circumstantial evidence, motive assumes significant
importance. The learned Trial Court failed to approach the
matter with the required care and caution. Learned Trial Court
passed a cursory and non-speaking judgment without
correlating oral evidence with documentary evidence. The
appellant, who was on bail during trial owing to inconsistencies
in the prosecution case, is a young student of borderline age,
and continued incarceration will gravely prejudice his future.
20. Learned counsel further submitted that the alleged
recovery of the motorcycle of the accused from the vicinity of
the place of occurrence does not firmly establish that the
accused-appellant has committed the crime. She submitted that
mere presence or recovery of a vehicle from a nearby area, in
the absence of any cogent and independent evidence proving
its use in the commission of the offence, cannot be treated as
an incriminating circumstance. According to learned counsel,
the prosecution has failed to conclusively prove that the
recovery of the said motorcycle was connected with the murder
of Smt. Chandi Bai.
21. Thus, learned counsel submitted that the prosecution has
miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The
findings of the Trial Court are vague, perverse, contrary to
settled principles of law, and based on unreliable, hearsay and
uncorroborated evidence. She, therefore, prays that the appeal
of the appellant may be allowed and the impugned judgment
dated 07.08.2024 may be quashed and set aside.
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (8 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
22. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions
made by the counsel for the appellant and has supported the
prosecution case set out before the learned trial court and he
submits that there is no infirmity in the judgment passed by the
learned trial court convicting the appellant under Section 302 &
455 IPC vide judgment dated 07.08.2024.
23. We have considered the submissions made before this Court
and have carefully examined the relevant record of the case,
including the impugned judgment dated 07.08.2024.
24. PW-2 Ambalal complainant in his statements deposed that
the incident occurred about ten months prior at around 1:30 PM.
In the statement he stated that he had returned from school after
picking up his child. After leaving the child at home, he proceeded
to his mother's room to fetch grass kept for the cow. When he
entered the room, he saw a boy aged about 25-26 years, who
pushed him aside and fled away. He then noticed that both the
legs of his mother, Smt. Chandi Bai, had been amputated and
silver anklets were lying on the ground. A rope was tied around
her neck. The assailant was wearing a red T-shirt and jeans. He
stated that he chased him, but the assailant took another route.
Neighbours had gathered on hearing the commotion; Renu
(Reena) and other persons also came on spot. He further stated
that when the assailant's pushed him, blood-stained hands left
marks on his clothes. He further stated that thereafter, when the
police examined CCTV footage, he was informed that it is the
accused-appellant who was found sitting in the bathroom on the
roof of Satyanarayan's house, from where he was apprehended.
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (9 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
In the Test Identification Parade (Ex.P.8), the said witness has
identified the accused appellant Rakesh.
25. PW-3 Naina @ Ranu stated that the incident occurred on
Tuesday, 26.07.2022, at about 1:30 PM. She stated that at the
time of occurrence, she had returned from school and was
changing clothes at home. The deceased, Smt. Chandi bai, was
her great-grandmother and resided in the outer room of their
house. While she was near the gate getting her hair dressed, she
saw a man, who was roaming in the area two or three times. She
presumed him to be a labourer from the nearby construction site.
At that moment, her grandfather Ambalal shouted,
and raised an alarm. She then saw a man running away after
pushing Ambalal. She further stated that she identified that
person in court. She stated that the said man ran and hide in the
house of one
Sharmaji from where he was apprehended. In the Test
Identification Parade (Ex.P.9), the said witness has identified the
accused appellant Rakesh.
26. PW-1 Tahir Bohra, an electrical shop owner situated at
Diwakar Nagar on Main Chamtikheda Road, deposed in his
statement that in July 2022, one person came to his shop to buy
pliers. Initially, the person requested his personal pliers, but upon
refusal, he purchased a new pair, for which PW-1 issued a bill in
the name of "Rakesh Bhilwara." He handed over a photocopy of
the bill to the police, which was exhibited as Ex.P-02. PW-1 stated
that at his shop CCTV cameras have also been installed. The police
taken the footage into a pen drive in his presence, and he issued a
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (10 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, marked as
Exhibit P-01. He identified the accused in test identification parade
present in court as the person who purchased the pliers, which
was exhibited as Ex-P4.
27. PW-10 Satyanarayan stated in his statement that he
resides at Diwakar Nagar, Chamtikheda, and has a CCTV camera
installed outside his house. The police obtained the footage from
him after informing him that a murder had taken place behind his
house. He stated that the police apprehended a boy from
Sanjayji's house. The CCTV footage showed a boy running, and
the police took the footage in a pen drive. He issued a certificate,
which is Exhibit P-24. As he did not fully support the prosecution
story, he was declared hostile; however, he admitted that the
police had apprehended a boy from Sanjay's house and that the
CCTV footage showed a boy running.
28. PW-13 Vandan Joshi deposed that he had a CCTV camera
installed at his house at Diwakar Nagar, Chamtikheda. He provided
CCTV footage dated 26.07.2022 to the Police Station Officer,
Chittorgarh, in a pen drive. He identified the photographs
extracted from the footage showing a person wearing a red shirt,
marked as Exhibit P-30. He stated that he appended his signature
over certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, which is
Exhibit P-31. He stated that he had seen the person depicted in
the photographs.
29. PW-5 Bhimraj stated that the incident occurred on
26.07.2022 at around 1:00-2:00 PM. His house is situated near
the place of occurrence. Upon hearing a commotion around 2:00
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (11 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
PM, he went to Ambalal's house, where he saw that both the legs
of the deceased were amputated. Several persons had gathered
before he arrived. They informed him that a boy wearing a red
shirt had fled and that he was later found hiding in a house
nearby, from where he was apprehended by the police.
30. PW-17 Motilal (Investigating Officer) Motilal stated in
his statement that upon receiving information, he reached at the
spot and conducted the investigation. He seized a blood-stained
axe, a blood-stained wooden stick, an iron rod, a wooden rolling
pin, a wooden plank, and two silver anklets from the scene of
occurrence under Seizure Memo Exhibit P-6. Blood-stained floor
material was collected using gauze under Exhibit P-7. The blood-
stained kurti and scarf of the deceased were seized vide Exhibit P-
12.
31. He further stated that after the incident, the accused was
apprehended from the bathroom of Sanjay Sharma's house; from
where he seized a blood-stained cotton ball vide Exhibit P-15.
After arrest, the blood-stained shirt, jeans and shoes worn by the
accused were seized through Exhibit P-26. These facts were
corroborated by PW-2 Ambalal, PW-5 Bhimraj, and PW-7 Anand.
32. PW-17 further stated that at the time of postmortem he
seized the rope tied around the neck of the deceased; vide Exhibit
P-16, which is corroborated by PW-2 Ambalal, PW-5 Bhimraj and
PW-7 Anand. The Panchayatnama (Exhibit P-10) also mentioned
the cause of death as suffocation. PW-11 Dr. Sanjay Pareekh, who
conducted the postmortem, confirmed that the cause of death was
asphyxia due to strangulation.
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (12 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
33. As per the Forensic Science Laboratory Report (Exhibit P-41),
the blood-stained axe, wooden block, two iron rods, wooden
rolling pin, two silver anklets, the blood-stained floor sample
collected on gauze, the blood-stained cotton swab recovered from
the bathroom where the accused was found hiding, as well as the
blood-stained shirt, jeans and shoes worn by the accused at the
time of his arrest, and the blood-stained kurti and shawl of the
deceased, were all found to contain human blood of the same
blood group "AB". The accused has offered no explanation
whatsoever for the presence of human blood of identical blood
group on the articles seized from the scene of crime and on the
clothes recovered from his person.
34. The recovery of the weapon of offence--namely, the iron axe
--along with the wooden mallet, iron rods, wooden rolling pin, the
silver anklets worn by the deceased, and the blood-stained floor
material from the room, all bearing human blood of the same
group, corroborates the prosecution version that the accused
attempted to remove the silver anklets from the legs of the
deceased for the purpose of robbery. When he was unable to
remove them, he amputated the deceased's legs with the axe, and
upon the complainant arriving at the spot, fled leaving the anklets
behind. The forensic report, therefore, forms a complete and
cogent link in the chain of circumstances pointing unerringly
towards the guilt of the accused.
35. So far as the question of connecting the accused with the
offence by verifying the shop from where he allegedly purchased
the pliers is concerned, the Investigating Officer, PW-17 Motilal,
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (13 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
stated that on the basis of the information furnished by the
accused, he verified the purchase by Ex.P.19. This fact stands
corroborated by PW-5 Bhimraj and PW-6 Vinit Kumar in their
respective depositions. PW-1 Tahir Bohra further testified that on
the date of the incident, a boy had purchased pliers from his shop,
whom he duly identified as the accused. He also handed over the
bill and the CCTV footage of his shop to the police, which clearly
demonstrate that the accused had purchased the pliers used in
the incident from his shop. The said pliers were seized from the
scene of occurrence by the Investigating Officer under Exhibit P-6
at about 3:00 PM immediately after the incident. Significantly, PW-
1 Tahir Bohra was neither cross-examined on this aspect nor was
any suggestion put to him disputing the fact that the pliers
recovered from the crime scene were purchased from his shop or
that no bill had been issued. Thus, the prosecution has
satisfactorily established that the pliers recovered from the scene
of crime were indeed purchased by the accused from PW-1 Tahir
Bohra.
36. The recovery of the motorcycle from the vicinity of the place
of occurrence has not been treated by the Trial Court as a
standalone circumstance to hold the accused guilty, but only as an
ancillary fact forming part of the surrounding circumstances. Even
otherwise, the conviction of the appellant does not solely rest
upon this recovery. The chain of incriminating evidence against
the accused stands independently established through reliable
ocular, documentary and forensic evidence. Therefore, the
contention that the recovery of the motorcycle is irrelevant or
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (14 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
insufficient to connect the accused with the commission of crime
does not advance the case of the appellant. The submission being
devoid of merit is accordingly rejected.
37. Regarding the question of verification of the scene of crime
by the accused, the Investigating Officer has stated that he
conducted such verification (Exhibit P-17) on the basis of the
accused's information (Exhibit P-37). This stands supported by the
testimonies of PW-5 Bhimraj and PW-6 Vinit Kumar. PW-17 Motilal
further deposed that he prepared the site map (Exhibit P-13),
seized a blood-stained axe (Exhibit P-6), and collected bloodstains
from the floor (Exhibit P-7) on the very day of the incident. He
also admitted in cross-examination that he was already aware of
the place of occurrence before the accused allegedly verified the
scene. No new fact was discovered nor was any recovery made
pursuant to such verification. In these circumstances, the so-
called verification of the scene by the accused holds no probative
value and cannot, by itself, be relied upon to connect the accused
with the crime.
38. The presence of the accused in the CCTV footage captured in
the vicinity of the place of occurrence stands duly fortified by the
ocular evidence. The accused has failed to furnish any explanation
whatsoever regarding his presence near Ambalal's House at the
relevant point of time. Admittedly, he is neither a relative nor an
acquaintance of Ambalal. In the absence of any plausible
explanation from the accused, his unexplained presence in close
proximity to the scene of crime constitutes an additional
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:4591-DB] (15 of 15) [SOSA-582/2025]
incriminating circumstance, strengthening the chain of
circumstances established by the prosecution.
39. However, from the overall evidence adduced, it clearly
emerges that the accused, after committing lurking house-
trespass into the complainant's house with the intent to assault,
caused the death of the deceased by amputating her leg with an
axe and placing a noose around her neck in order to remove the
silver anklets she was wearing. The injuries inflicted, which
culminated in the death of the deceased, fully satisfy the
ingredients of the offence of murder.
40. On the question of quantum of sentence, we have heard
learned counsel for accused-appellant and have carefully
considered the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the
entire material available on record.
41. In view of aforesaid discussion and observation, we find that
the learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the
accused appellant for the offences as mentioned hereinabove and
we do not find any infirmity or perversity in the concurrent
findings of learned trial Court. Hence, impugned judgment dated
07.08.2024 is upheld.
42. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
43. Consequently, the application for suspension of sentence also
stands rejected.
44. Office is directed to send the record to the learned trial Court
forthwith.
(CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
39-Kartik/C.P.Goyal/-
(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 12:47:57 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
