Not Safe To Rely On Testimony Of Police When Independent And Material Witnesses Have Turned Hostile: Rajasthan HC Upholds Acquittal In 1988 Dacoity Case
The Rajasthan High Court has observed that it is not safe to rely upon the testimony of police to establish charges beyond reasonable doubt, more so when independent and material witnesses have turned hostile.
The Bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal observed, “This Court is of the considered view that it is not safe to rely upon the testimony of police officials to establish charges No.1 and 2 against accused-appellants beyond reasonable doubt, more so when both independent and material witnesses namely Maharaj Singh (PW-5) and Hukum Singh (PW-6) have turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution case as much as the prosecution story itself does not inspire confidence and cannot be believed to be free from exaggeration and embellishment, hence, this Court deems it just and proper to extend the benefit of doubt to accused-appellants and acquit them of charges No.1 and 2 framed against them in the present case.”
PP Sher Singh Mahla appeared for the Appellants whereas Advocate Vinit Sharma appeared for the Respondents.
The State filed various appeals against the judgment of acquittal in cases arising out of offences under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). The offences of dacoity were committed in the year 1988 by the Respondents. Two of the cases were also registered for the offences under Sections 395, 397, 399 and 402 and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act.
In the factual matrix of each case, it was alleged that there was an involvement of more than five miscreants but only three were arrested in all four appeals and their arrest was inter-linked.
The Court opined that after considering the overall facts and circumstances of the cases, the conviction of the Respondents was done after placing reliance on the testimony of police officials only and by drawing presumption against Respondents for their guilt is neither proper nor in accordance with the law and, therefore, is not liable to be sustained, so far as the conviction for offences under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC is concerned.
“The incident in question is of 28.04.1988 it means of about 36 years and during this period, accused-appellants have suffered immense mental agony and trauma to face criminal trial as also the present criminal appeal is pending since 1990, therefore, considering all such mitigating circumstances and the quantum of punishment provided for offence under Section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act, this Court deems it just and proper to reduce the sentence period to the period already undergone by accused-appellants.”, the Court held while partly allowing the first appeal.
For the other three appeals, the Court noted that it was not established by the prosecution evidence that which Respondent was holding which deadly weapon used in the commission of the dacoity and in the absence of any specific charge, the offence of Section 397 of the IPC cannot be held to be proved.
The Court reiterated, “It can be presumed to be a settled proposition of law that the Appellate Court should not ordinarily set aside the judgment of acquittal, and interference in a routine manner is not warranted merely for the reason that an another view is possible, usually such approach by the Appellate Court to interfere with findings of acquittal should be avoided unless there are compelling circumstances and good reasons warranting interference with findings of acquittal to achieve ultimate cause of justice.”
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Appeal filed by the State and upheld the judgment of acquittal of Respondents of charges for the offence under Sections 396 and 397 of the IPC.
Cause Title: State of Rajasthan v. Devendra and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:RJ-JP:24445)
Appearances:
Appellant: PP Sher Singh Mahla
Respondents: Advocates Vinit Sharma and BM Sharma