Panna Vs. State of Rajasthan

Panna vs State of Rajasthan

Disposition Appeal allowed Court Rajasthan Decided Feb 18, 1982

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/758941

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/758941
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: M.C. Jain and; M.B. Sharma, JJ.
Decided On: Feb 18, 1982
Case Number: D.B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 162/1976
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Appeal allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

PENAL CODE - Section 302--Axe & clothes not sent to chemical Examiner & recovery is not of incriminating nature--Presence of accused in hut is not consistent with conduct of a guilty person--Accused last seen with accused--Held, it is not sufficient to connect accused with crime.;Neither the clothes nor the ...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Appeal allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Panna

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 1982WLN(UC)115

Excerpt

.....the accused appellant.;the conduct of the accused that be was present in the hut immediately after the occurrence is not consistent with that of a guilty man. thus we are unable to say on the statement of ladu that the accused was last seen with the deceased. that apart, the only evidence that the accused was last seen in the company of the deceased, in the facts and circumstances of the case does not connect the accused with the crime.;appeal allowed. - section 2(k), 2(1), 7 & 40 & juvenile justice (care and protection of children) rules, 2007, rule 12 & 98 & juvenile justice act, 1986, section 2(h): [altamas kabir & cyriac joseph, jj] determination as to juvenile - appellant was found to have completed the age of 16 years and 13 days on the date of alleged occurrence - appellant was arrested on 30.11.1998 when the 1986 act was in force and under clause (h) of section 2 a juvenile was described to mean a child who had not attained the age of sixteen years or a girl who had not attained the age of eighteen years - it is with the enactment of the juvenile justice act, 2000, that in section 2(k) a juvenile or child was defined to mean a child who had not completed eighteen years of a ge which was given prospective prospect - appellant was about sixteen years of age on the date of commission of the alleged offence and had not completed eighteen years of age when the juvenile justice act, 2000, came into force - juvenile act, of 2000 has been given retrospective effect by rule 12 of juvenile justice rule, 2007 - as such, accused has to be treated as juvenile under the said act. - 2. the case of the prosecution is that the accused panna and saman-der had a common well in village mandalgarh. 2 who is the real brother of deceased samander saw that samander deceased and the accused were on the well. 2 that the accused was always seen on the well......to be tried. the prosecution examined six witnesses and the accused was examined under section 313 cr. p.c. he stands on a bare plea of denial.3. the learned sessions judge placing reliance on the evidence of ladu who gave evidence about the fact that the deceased was last seen in the company of the accused, on the recovery of blood stained clothes, on the recovery of the blood stained axe, convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid.4. we have heard learned counsel and the learned public prosecutor and have gone through the material on record. so far as the recovery of blood stained clothes and the axe is concerned, it may be stated at the very outset that neither the clothes nor the axe were sent to the chemical examiner and in the absence of the report of the chemical examine & the serologist, it cannot be said that there was human blood on them. thus the recovery of clothes and the axe cannot be said to be incriminating evidence against the accused appellant. there remains only the ft dement of ladu p.w. 2 who is the real brother of deceased samander. he has stated that before half an hour he had seen the accused and the deceased together. the accused and the deceased lived nearby and it has been admitted by ladu p.w. 2 that the accused was always seen on the well. it has also been admitted by ladu that when he and others reached the spot, the accused was in his hut. the conduct of the accused that he was present in the hut immediately after the occurrence is not consistent with that of a guilty man. thus we are unable to say on the statement of ladu that the accused was last seen with the deceased. that apart the only evidence that the accused was last seen in the company of the deceased, in the facts and circumstances of the case, does not connect the accused with the crime.5. in the result, we allow the appeal, set aside the judgment under which the accused has been convicted and sentenced. we acquit the accused of the charge under section 302.....

Full Judgment

1. The learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara has convicted the accused appellant Panna under Section 302 I.P.C. and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused Panna and Saman-der had a common well in village Mandalgarh. A few days prior to the occurrence which is said to have been taken place on May 22, 1975, deceased Samander and the accused had quarrelled over some matter. On the day of the incident Ladu P.W. 2 who is the real brother of deceased Samander saw that Samander deceased and the accused were on the well. After about an hour he heard that Samander is lying dead. A report was lodged in the police station by one Geesa P.W. 3 but the name of the accused was not mentioned therein because having come to know that Samander was lying injured, Geesa immediately went to the police station. The accused was suspected of having committed the offence and was arrested His clothes were found to be blood stained and were seized and sealed. After his arrest on a discovery statement made by the accused under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, an axe alleged to be the weapon of offence was recovered. A charge under Section 302 I.P.C. was framed against the accused and he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined six witnesses and the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. He stands on a bare plea of denial.

3. The learned Sessions Judge placing reliance on the evidence of Ladu who gave evidence about the fact that the deceased was last seen in the company of the accused, on the recovery of blood stained clothes, on the recovery of the blood stained axe, convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid.

4. We have heard learned Counsel and the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the material on record. So far as the recovery of blood stained clothes and the axe is concerned, it may be stated at the very outset that neither the clothes nor the axe were sent to the Chemical Examiner and in the absence of the Report of the Chemical Examine & the Serologist, it cannot be said that there was human blood on them. Thus the recovery of clothes and the axe cannot be said to be incriminating evidence against the accused appellant. There remains only the ft dement of Ladu P.W. 2 who is the real brother of deceased Samander. He has stated that before half an hour he had seen the accused and the deceased together. The accused and the deceased lived nearby and it has been admitted by Ladu P.W. 2 that the accused was always seen on the well. It has also been admitted by Ladu that when he and others reached the spot, the accused was in his hut. The conduct of the accused that he was present in the hut immediately after the occurrence is not consistent with that of a guilty man. Thus we are unable to say on the statement of Ladu that the accused was last seen with the deceased. That apart the only evidence that the accused was last seen in the company of the deceased, in the facts and circumstances of the case, does not connect the accused with the crime.

5. In the result, we allow the appeal, set aside the judgment under which the accused has been convicted and sentenced. We acquit the accused of the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. The accused is in jail. He shall be set at liberty, forthwith if not wanted in any other case.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 1982 Same Parties Panna vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge M.C. Jain and; M.B. Sharma, JJ.

Criminal