STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RAM NIWAS
LAWS(SC)-2002-2-67
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on
February 07,2002
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Appellant
VERSUS
RAM NIWAS
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RABARI MAFABHAI RUGNATHBHAI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-227] [REFERRED TO]STATE OF GUJARAT VS. DIGVIJAYSINH BHUPATSINH JADEJA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-536] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. PARAMJIT @ KALI HIMMATSINGH CHIMA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. BABUSINH SOMSINH RATHOD [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-50] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. CHANDRAKANT GORDHANDAS TEHLANIA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-332] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SAJID [LAWS(GJH)-2023-2-2016] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. KOLI ARJAN SAMAT VADHER [LAWS(GJH)-2023-3-612] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. ANANTKUMAR CHANDULAL KANOJIYA [LAWS(GJH)-2023-3-834] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RAKESH SARJUPRASAD KAHAR [LAWS(GJH)-2022-9-1031] [REFERRED TO]
ANSHUBEN SIDDHESHVAR UPADHYAY VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2020-1-302] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. AMRATBHAI PRABHURAM DAVE [LAWS(GJH)-2021-3-330] [REFERRED TO]
HINABEN PIYUSH GANDHI VS. HAIDAR ABBAS SHEKH PROPRIETOR OF CREATIVE COOLS [LAWS(GJH)-2021-3-354] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. BIPINBHAI SHIVLALBHAI KANKHARA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-506] [REFERRED TO]
BIMAL KRISHNA NATH VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2023-10-5] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RAIB JUSAB SAMA MUSALMAN [LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-1687] [REFERRED TO]
RANJANBEN VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-660] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. LAXMANBHAI BHIKHABHAI PARMAR [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-736] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SANJAYRAV ASHOKRABV OMPURE & 2 OTHER(S) [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-17] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. BAKULABEN W/O SANJAYBHAI BHUPATLAL KOTHARI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-14] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SAJID [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-472] [REFERRED TO]
PATEL RAGINIBEN PRAKASHBHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-28] [REFERRED TO]
PATEL PRAKASHBHAI AMBALAL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-66] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HAJUBEN W/O. HUSHENBHAI [LAWS(GJH)-2023-5-774] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. JAYANTIBHAI JIVANBHAI GOHIL [LAWS(GJH)-2023-1-16] [REFERRED TO]
DAJABHAI LUMBABHAI VS. MANCHARAM DWARKADAS SADHU [LAWS(GJH)-2022-8-703] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. CHIMANBHAI THAKORBHAI CHAUHAN [LAWS(GJH)-2022-9-9] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. ROSHANBHAI FAKIRMOHAMAD SHAIKH [LAWS(GJH)-2022-9-25] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. KANTIBHAI PREMJIBHAI SOLANKI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-9-1193] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. JAKIR [LAWS(GJH)-2022-9-1448] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. PATEL PARSHOTTAM AMBALAL [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-47] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RAJPUT ROHITBHAI MANUBHA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-410] [REFERRED TO]
M. A. PATEL VS. SURESHBHAI JOGAJI THAKORE [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-1529] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. GOVINDBHAI MADHUBHAI KOLI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-1350] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. VAGHARI SURESHBHAI RATNABHAI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-5] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HADISULLAH BAHADURALI CHAUDHARI & 2 OTHER(S) [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-36] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. BHATHIJI PUNJAJI MAKWANA & 4 OTHER(S) [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-38] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. ANNI POOJARI [LAWS(KAR)-2004-12-12] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. GOHIL MAHENDRASINH AJITSINH [LAWS(GJH)-2023-3-516] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MAHENDRAKUMAR @ MENDO KRUSHNAPRASAD DAVE [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-58] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. NARANBHAI GANESHBHAI PATEL [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-268] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SHIRINBEN MURTUJA BHABHARAWALA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-3-431] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SAMUBEN [LAWS(GJH)-2023-1-1836] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. AMRUTBHAI JIVANLAL PATEL [LAWS(GJH)-2023-3-378] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. KARIMBHAI UMARBHAI SHAIKH [LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-1316] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. THAKORE CHAMANJI MOTIJI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-8-81] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SHRIRAM SHANKARRAV BAROSE [LAWS(GJH)-2022-9-1467] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. GOVINDBHARTHI GANAPATBHARTHI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-11-15] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. VAGHRI GOVABHAI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-3] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION VS. A. RAJA [LAWS(DLH)-2024-3-110] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. ASHOK MANSURBHAI DANGAR [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-421] [REFERRED TO]
SEEMA SHUKLA VS. GURUDUTT SHUKLA [LAWS(MPH)-2020-5-192] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. DEEPAK [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-154] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. NARENDRABHAI VITTHALRAO JADAV [LAWS(GJH)-2023-1-1369] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. LAKHAJI DHARMAJI THAKOR [LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-601] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. KOLI KANA RASHI [LAWS(GJH)-2020-1-132] [REFERRED TO]
VARRE VEERA RAGHAVAMMA VS. DEVARA SUYA SATYA ANANDA RAO [LAWS(APH)-2023-8-44] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HARISANG VAJESANG RANA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-1-1053] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MER RANA UKA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-100] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MODI KANAIYALAL MULCHANDDAS [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-1348] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. JAYENDRA NARANBHAI VARA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-1295] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. ABDUL GAFAR KADARMIYA @ RAJPUTBAPU SAIYAD [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-48] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. JAGDISHBHAI KESHABHAI MAKVANA [LAWS(GJH)-2023-3-336] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. LALJI TEJAJI THAKOR [LAWS(GJH)-2022-6-421] [REFERRED TO]
RAO MAHESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-311] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD VS. KESHAVJIBHAI NATHABHAI RATHOD [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-1176] [REFERRED TO]
H.K.THAKUR VS. NAZIR NOORMOHMED KARA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-1434] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. THANABHAI GANESHBHAI RAJPUT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-3-1255] [REFERRED TO]
STATAE OF GUJARAT VS. AHER LAKHMAN HARDAS [LAWS(GJH)-2022-8-17] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. THAKOR LALJI GAMBHARJI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-912] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORKUMAR PRAKASHBHAI PARMAR (DALIT) VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2021-3-348] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. NARSHI SHIVJI BHANUSHALI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-4] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MEHBUB BHIKHABHAI QURESHI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-10-37] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MAHAMADHUSEN SULEMAN GAJIYA [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-990] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. POPATJI VALJI THAKORE [LAWS(GJH)-2022-9-29] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)The respondent was married to Sneh Lata on 25/03/1986. A child, namely, vishwas (PW-2) was born to the parties in the year 1988. Sneh Lata died on 22/12/1993 in her house. It is alleged that poison was administered to her by the respondent - her husband in the presence of Vishwas, PW-2. The first information report was lodged by the brother of the deceased on the same day at 11.30 p. m. in the night. The respondent was charged for the commission of the offence punishable under sections 302 and 498a of the Indian penal Code. After recording the evidence, the trial court acquitted the accused. Leave to file acquittal appeal was denied by the high Court vide the order impugned in this appeal by special leave.
(2.)Relying upon the statement of PW-2, learned counsel appearing for the appellant- state has urged that the trial court was not justified in acquitting the respondent because pw-2 had categorically stated that poison was administered to his mother - sneh Lata by his father-respondent. It is further submitted that as there is no infirmity in the statement of PW-2, the same could be made the basis for conviction of the respondent.
(3.)The trial court has taken note of undisputed facts and thereafter referred to the statement of PW-2 wherein the facts of the occurrence have been narrated by the said witness. After noticing certain inherent defects and keeping in mind the statement of dw-1 Renu, who was admittedly present at the time when occurrence took place and apparently being influenced by the fact that prem Chand Soni, another person who is stated to have come on the spot immediately after occurrence, had not been examined as witness by the prosecution, the trial court concluded that it was difficult to rely upon the testimony of the child witness for the purpose of convicting the respondent. On appreciation of facts and keeping in mind the narrations of PW-2, the trial court concluded that he was a tutored witness.
(2.)Relying upon the statement of PW-2, learned counsel appearing for the appellant- state has urged that the trial court was not justified in acquitting the respondent because pw-2 had categorically stated that poison was administered to his mother - sneh Lata by his father-respondent. It is further submitted that as there is no infirmity in the statement of PW-2, the same could be made the basis for conviction of the respondent.
(3.)The trial court has taken note of undisputed facts and thereafter referred to the statement of PW-2 wherein the facts of the occurrence have been narrated by the said witness. After noticing certain inherent defects and keeping in mind the statement of dw-1 Renu, who was admittedly present at the time when occurrence took place and apparently being influenced by the fact that prem Chand Soni, another person who is stated to have come on the spot immediately after occurrence, had not been examined as witness by the prosecution, the trial court concluded that it was difficult to rely upon the testimony of the child witness for the purpose of convicting the respondent. On appreciation of facts and keeping in mind the narrations of PW-2, the trial court concluded that he was a tutored witness.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.