Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2239 (RAJ)

Ramveer v. State of Rajasthan

2018-12-03

MANOJ KUMAR GARG, PRADEEP NANDRAJOG

body2018
JUDGMENT 1. On 31.12.2007, Anwar Ahmed P.W.-13 reached Police Station, Makrana and to the duty officer gave information that his elder brother Hazi Zaheer Ahmed left the house at 8.30 p.m. the day before i.e. 30.12.2007 on a red coloured motor-cycle bearing registration No. RJ21-5M-2608 informing him that he was visiting the tenants. Since his brother did not return till 9.00 a.m. the next day he was lodging the information. In the statement he also informed that his brother was having some problem on the issue of rent with the tenants. Based on the statement FIR Exhibit-98 was registered for the offence punishable under Section 364 IPC. 2. The only information with the Investigating Officer, S.H.O. Pramod Swami P.W.-15 was the destination of the brother of the complainant i.e. the place where the tenants resided. Based on this lead, it is apparent that the Investigating Officer contacted the tenants which included the appellant. The appellant was found to be having bruise marks on his face. There was blueness of colour in the nails of his hand. He obviously became a suspect. The appellant was interrogated and he made a confessional statement informing that he had killed the deceased by hitting his head with a stone. He volunteered to take the Investigating Officer to the place where he had killed the deceased and thereafter thrown the dead body. The place where he had parked the motor-cycle. The place where he had thrown the stone with which he had killed the deceased. All this took place before lunch on 31.12.2007. Vide arrest memo Exhibit-99 the appellant was arrested at 1.00 p.m. on 31.12.2007. He also disclosed that the pant and the t-shirt as also the shoes which he was wearing when he committed the crime got stained with the blood of the deceased. He volunteered to get them recovered. Pursuant to his disclosure statement he led the Investigating Officer to a railway line and a little away from the road-crossing, evidenced by the site plan Exhibit-P2 and as recorded in the seizure memo Exhibit-100 he pointed the place where the dead body of the deceased was thrown by him. The dead body was seized. As recorded in the said seizure memo the motor-cycle was also got recovered at a little distance away from the dead body. The dead body was seized. As recorded in the said seizure memo the motor-cycle was also got recovered at a little distance away from the dead body. At a little distance he pointed to the spot where he claimed to have hit the deceased from where blood stained earth was lifted as recorded in the said seizure memo. The dead body was sent to the mortuary for post-mortem. At 3.35 p.m. as recorded in the seizure memo Exhibit-101 he led the Investigating Officer to the place where he had thrown the stone used by him to injure the deceased. The stone was seized. 3. The forensic mobile unit was summoned. As recorded in the seizure memo Exhibit-P16 nail clippings of the appellant were taken at 8.40 p.m. The appellant was taken to the Community Health Centre, Makrana where Dr. Sageer Ahmed P.W.-10 examined him and recorded scratch marks on the neck vide MLC Exhibit-105. 4. Dr. Sageer Ahmed P.W.-10 was a part of the team which conducted the post-mortem which drew up the post-mortem report Exhibit-P50 recording therein 12 lacerated wounds on the face, forehead and the skull of the deceased an incised wound on the neck muscle deep and ligature marks on the neck. Cause of death was the multiple injuries on the head. 5. Since the appellant had disclosed that the pant and t-shirt as also the shoes which he was wearing when the crime was committed got stained with blood he got recovered the same as per seizure memo Exhibit-20. 6. Since post-mortem report recorded an incised wound on the neck of the deceased the appellant was further interrogated on 03.01.2008 and pursuant to his disclosure statement he got recovered a knife as per Exhibit-P22. 7. The clothes of the deceased, the various articles and objects recovered pursuant to the disclosure statement of the appellant and his nail clippings were sent for forensic examination and as per FSL report Exhibit-106 it was opined that the blood group of the deceased was 'O' and blood of the same group was detected on the knife, the stone, as also on the nail clippings of the appellant and the blood stained earth which was recovered and seized from the spot pointed out by the appellant as the place where he had murdered the deceased. Blood was detected on the pant, t-shirt and shoes got recovered by the appellant. 8. Blood was detected on the pant, t-shirt and shoes got recovered by the appellant. 8. During investigation statements of Mohd. Safi P.W.-4, Mohd. Umar P.W.-8 and Gulam Rasool P.W.-12 were recorded. The former two informed the Investigating Officer that on the night of 30.12.2007 they had seen the deceased proceeding in the direction of the place where the accused resided and carried on business. As per Gulam Rasool P.W.-12 he had seen the deceased in the company of the accused on the motor-cycle on 30.12.2007. 9. It is apparent that the appellant was sent for trial with the following incriminating circumstances sought to be proved against him for having murdered the deceased:- (i) That the deceased left his house in the night of 30.12.2007 informing his younger brother that he was visiting the tenants to collect the rent. (ii) P.W.-4 and P.W.-8 saw the deceased at the night of 30.12.2007 proceeding towards the residence and work place of the appellant. (iii) P.W.-12 having last seen the deceased and the appellant on the same motor-cycle in the night of 30.12.2007. (iv) Recovery of the dead body of the deceased and the motorcycle of the deceased pursuant to the disclosure statement made by the appellant. (v) The pant and t-shirt and the shoes which the appellant was wearing at the time of the crime being detected with blood Blood of group 'O' being detected on the stone and knife got recovered by the appellant. (vi) Nails of the fingers of the appellant being detected with blood and on the nail clippings blood of human origin of 'O' group was detected. (vii) Scratch injuries on the neck of the appellant. 10. At the trial the witnesses of the recovery, the witnesses of the deceased having left his house to visit the tenants and the witness of last seen i.e. P.W.-12 stood their ground. The Investigating Officer deposed the facts pertaining to the investigation done and proved the recovery memos. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem and medically examined the appellant proved the post-mortem and the MLC of the appellant. 11. We have perused the testimony of the witnesses and nothing has been shown to us in cross-examination to dis-credit their testimony. The Investigating Officer deposed the facts pertaining to the investigation done and proved the recovery memos. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem and medically examined the appellant proved the post-mortem and the MLC of the appellant. 11. We have perused the testimony of the witnesses and nothing has been shown to us in cross-examination to dis-credit their testimony. The doctor i.e. P.W.-10 who examined the appellant after the appellant was arrested has proved the MLC of the appellant and relevant would it be note that the suggestion given to him that the marks could be the result of a child playing in the lap of the appellant has been denied. In his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the appellant has not explained the scratch marks on his neck. He has not explained the recovery of human blood of group 'O' on the clippings of his nails. He has not explained the recoveries attributable to him. 12. Learned counsel for the appellant urges that the contents of the FIR and the testimony of P.W.-4 and P.W.-8, at best, evidence that on the night of 30.12.2007 the deceased left on his motorcycle to visit the tenants and not specifically the appellant. Attacking the credit-worthiness of P.W.-12, learned counsel drew our attention to the fact that the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded after 2 months and 6 days of the deceased being missing. Counsel urges that as per the testimony of the witness, he was a member of the same community and it is not believable that he would not have informed the family members that on the night of 30.12.2007 he had seen the deceased in the company of the appellant on the same motor-cycle. Counsel urges that the witness is obviously planted. As regards the recovery of a stone and the knife at the instance of the appellant on which human blood of group 'O' was detected and from the nail clippings of the appellant human blood of the same group was detected, as also the pant and t-shirt and the shoes got recovered by the appellant being detected with human blood of the same group, counsel urges that the incriminating worth of the evidence is minimal for the reason large number of people in the society would have blood group 'O'. Regarding the recovery of the dead body and the motor-cycle, counsel urges that the recovery is tainted for the reason the dead body and the motor-cycle were recovered at 1.15 p.m. and the stone was recovered at 3.35 p.m. 13. Pertaining to the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, suffice it to state that as recorded in the arrest memo the appellant was arrested at 1.15 p.m. and he had made the disclosure statement pursuant whereto within 15 minutes the Investigating Officer was led to the railway line from where the dead body of the deceased was recovered and at a little distance away the motor-cycle on which the deceased left his house the previous night was recovered. Blood stained earth was also recovered and seized from the spot nearby where the appellant stated to have murdered the deceased. The stone was thrown at some distance. Time would be consumed to draw up the recovery memo of the dead body and the motor-cycle etc. and prepare a rough site plan. Thus, merely because the stone was recovered after 2 hours and 20 minutes would not taint the recoveries made. 14. Having found no taint in the recoveries made pursuant to the disclosure statement made by the appellant and the fact that after he was arrested the pant, t-shirt and shoes which he stated was wearing when the crime was committed were detected with human blood of group 'O' and his nail clippings also had said blood group detected, we have credit-worthy evidence before us that the appellant had indulged in some activity and had committed an act during which his clothes got stained with blood and his nails also got stained with blood. It may be true that a large population have blood group 'O', but people don't get blood stains on their clothes and their shoes unless they are injured or they come into proximate distance i.e. have a physical interface with somebody who is injured and bleeding. This evidence is relevant and of an incriminating nature. 15. The scratch marks on the neck of the appellant are proof of the fact that from a proximate distance with another person the appellant and the said person had a physical altercation resulting in the other person inflicting scratch marks on the neck of the appellant. What was that something? This evidence is relevant and of an incriminating nature. 15. The scratch marks on the neck of the appellant are proof of the fact that from a proximate distance with another person the appellant and the said person had a physical altercation resulting in the other person inflicting scratch marks on the neck of the appellant. What was that something? It was obviously the other person trying to push the attacker. A person who is being hit by a stone and is being strangulated would obviously defend himself by outstretching the arms and trying to grab the assailant by the neck to either jerk the assailant away or disable the assailant. The injuries on the neck of the appellant are obviously proof of the fact that somebody was trying to ward off a brutal assault on him. 16. We would be constrained to ignore the testimony of P.W.-12 for the reasons we find merit in the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and thus the evidence that the deceased and the appellant were last seen together at around 9.00 p.m. in the night of 30.12.2007 is ignored by us. 17. The remaining incriminating evidence therefore would be:- (i) It being proved by the prosecution that the deceased left his house on his motor-cycle to visit the tenants and the accused is one of the many tenants. (ii) The second incriminating evidence is the scratch marks on the neck of the appellant when he was arrested and he having given no satisfactory explanation for the same and the scratch marks being strongly indicative of what we have written hereinabove while discussing the same. (iii) The third incriminating evidence would be the recovery of the stone and the knife at the instance of the appellant on which human blood of group 'O' was detected. The stone and the knife being the weapon of the offence established in the post-mortem report which shows that the injuries on the skull of the deceased were caused by blunt object with force and the incised wound on the neck caused by a knife. The clothes and the shoes got recovered by the appellant being detected with human blood. (iv) The forth incriminating evidence would be the knowledge of the appellant that the deceased had been killed after being repeatedly hit on the skull by stone. The clothes and the shoes got recovered by the appellant being detected with human blood. (iv) The forth incriminating evidence would be the knowledge of the appellant that the deceased had been killed after being repeatedly hit on the skull by stone. The appellant leading the Investigating Officer to the railway line pointing out the place where he had thrown the dead body. The dead body being recovered from the spot on the railway line. The motor-cycle being recovered at a little distance away. The spot where the deceased was murdered being detected with the blood of the deceased. 18. In our opinion chain of circumstances is complete to cross the level of 'would be' and to reach the level of 'should be'. The evidence unerringly points towards the guilt of the appellant and rules out his innocence. 19. Noting that the sentence imposed upon the appellant is to undergo imprisonment for life, we dismiss the appeal and affirm the sentence awarded to the appellant.