Summary Security Force Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Civil Offences Beyond Simple Hurt And Theft: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Vague Allegations Cannot Dissolve a Sacred Marital Relationship: Karnataka High Court Upholds Dismissal of Divorce Petition Daughters Entitled to Coparcenary Rights in Ancestral Property under Hindu Succession Act, 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Divorce | False Allegations of Domestic Violence and Paternity Questions Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Hostile Witness Testimony Admissible if Corroborated by Independent Evidence: Punjab and Haryana High Court Fraud Must Be Specifically Pleaded and Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt to Invalidate Registered Documents: Andhra Pradesh High Court Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Rash Driving Conviction But Grants Probation to First-Time Offender Bus Driver Orissa High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Husband Convicted of Wife's Murder Merit Cannot Be Sacrificed for Procedural Technicalities in NEET UG Admissions: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Upholds Partition Decrees: Unregistered Partition Deed Inadmissible, Fails to Prove Prior Partition - Joint Hindu Family Property Presumed Undivided: Patna High Court Section 195(1)(b) CrPC | Judicial Integrity Cannot Be Undermined: Supreme Court Restores Evidence Tampering Case In a NDPS Case Readiness and Willingness, Not Time, Decide Equity in Sale Agreements: Supreme Court Denies Specific Performance Prolonged Detention Violates Fundamental Rights Under Article 21: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Money Laundering Case DV ACT | Economic Abuse Includes Alienation of Assets, Necessitating Protection Orders: Allahabad High Court Illegal Structures to Face Demolition: Bombay HC Directs Strict Action Against Unauthorized Constructions Justice Must Extend to the Last Person Behind Bars: Supreme Court Pushes for Full Implementation of BNSS Section 479 to Relieve Undertrial Prisoners Efficiency Over Central Oversight: Supreme Court Asserts Need for Localized SIT in Chennai Case Partition, Not Injunction, Is Remedy for Joint Property Disputes: P&H High Court Dismisses Plea Subsequent Purchaser Can Question Plaintiff’s Intent: MP High Court Clarifies Specific Relief Act Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court NDPS Act Leaves No Room for Leniency: HC Requires Substantial Proof of Innocence for Bail No Protection Without Performance: MP High Court Denies Relief Under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act

Elements of Section 300 IPC Are Not Made Out: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Murder Conviction in 1987 Beating Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Rajasthan High Court sets aside Section 302 IPC conviction, upholds convictions under Sections 147, 323, and 325/149 IPC with probation benefits.

The Rajasthan High Court has partially allowed an appeal in a 1987 beating case, quashing the conviction under Section 302/149 IPC while maintaining convictions under lesser charges. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni, emphasized inconsistencies in witness testimonies and the lack of evidence linking the surviving appellants to the murder of the deceased, Raju Ram.

Facts of the Case:The incident occurred on October 2, 1987, when ten accused, armed with lathis and hockey sticks, allegedly attacked Madan Lal and others near Teliyon Ki Masjid in Kuchaman City. Raju Ram, who intervened, sustained fatal head injuries. The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 302/149, 325/149, 323, and 147 IPC, sentencing them to life imprisonment for murder and granting probation for the lesser charges. Three appellants passed away during the pendency of the appeal, leading to the abatement of their cases.

Witness Testimonies:The court noted that 10 out of 22 prosecution witnesses, including the injured eyewitness Madan Lal, turned hostile. Madan Lal testified that he lost consciousness during the fight and could not identify his assailants, weakening the prosecution's case. The court observed, "The subsequent retraction by these witnesses does not diminish the probative value of their earlier testimonies but introduces significant doubt in this context."

Contradictions and Evidence:The court highlighted material contradictions in witness testimonies regarding who inflicted the fatal injuries on Raju Ram. "The statements of PW.12, PW.13, PW.14, and PW.16 indicate that only the now-deceased accused Mansukhram and Kanaram were seen hitting Raju Ram on the head, with no clear evidence implicating the surviving appellants," the bench remarked. The FSL report's inability to determine the blood group on the recovered lathis further weakened the prosecution's case.

The court extensively discussed the elements required to establish common intention under Section 149 IPC and the necessity of direct evidence linking the accused to the crime. It concluded that the surviving appellants could not be held liable for murder due to the absence of intention, bodily injury, or knowledge requisite under Section 300 IPC. "The elements of Section 300 IPC are not made out against the surviving appellants," the judgment stated, emphasizing the long pendency and the appellants' advanced age.

Justice Bhati observed, "The prosecution has failed to provide conclusive evidence that the surviving appellants participated in the fatal assault on Raju Ram, warranting the quashing of the murder conviction."

The Rajasthan High Court's decision underscores the importance of consistent and reliable witness testimonies in securing convictions for serious offences. By setting aside the murder conviction while maintaining the lesser charges, the judgment reflects a nuanced application of legal principles concerning common intention and individual culpability. This ruling may influence future cases where witness reliability and direct evidence are pivotal in determining guilt.

Case Title: Mohana Ram &Ors. vs. The State of Rajasthan

Date of Decision: May 29, 2024

 

Similar News