LexABDUL WAHID & ANR. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 2 S.C.R. 2101 : 2025 INSC 295 Abdul Wahid & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan (Criminal Appeal No. 722 of 2012) 28 February 2025 [Pankaj Mithal and Ujjal Bhuyan,* JJ] Issue for Consideration Whether it is for the prosecution to connect the accused to the alleged crime by producing credible and legally admissible evidence to punish. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302/149 – Murder – Accused persons assaulted the victim and the informant somehow managed to escape and lodged the first information that victim was lying at the place of occurrence in an injured condition – Incident was witnessed by brother-in-law of the victim and another – Allegations that due to previous enmity, the seven accused persons formed unlawful assembly whereafter they assaulted the victim with a murderous intent – FIR lodged and chargesheet filed u/s.147/148/149/302 against the appellants – Trial court convicted the appellants u/s.302/148 – High Court modified the conviction by holding the appellants guilty of offence punishable u/s. 302 with the aid of u/s.149 – Correctness: Held: Though prosecution witnesses stated about the recovery of the weapons on the basis of information given by the accused persons, the manner in which the recoveries were made and the circumstances surrounding the recoveries made the recoveries highly suspect – That apart, the alleged recoveries were made after several days of the incident and no bloodstains etc. were found on the weapons – Doctor who had conducted the post- mortem examination, deposed in his evidence that the seized weapons were not shown to him – Knives were also not produced in court – Besides, all the seizure witnesses turned hostile – Thus, s.27 of the Evidence Act cannot come to the aid of the * Author 2102 [2025] 2 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports prosecution – Moreover, the clothes of the accused were not seized and sent for forensic examination to find out whether there were any bloodstains – Such examination would have revealed whether there were any bloodstains on the clothes; whether those bloodstains were of human blood; and whether those matched the blood of the deceased – Material inconsistency in the evidence of prosecution witnesses – No doubt that the death of victim is homicidal – Medical evidence has also confirmed multiple stab injuries on his body leading to profuse bleeding and death – According to the prosecution, it is the accused who had committed murder of the victim – Thus, it is for the prosecution to connect the accused to the murder of the deceased by producing credible and legally admissible evidence – However, no credible evidence at all to connect the accused persons with the homicidal death of the victim – In such circumstances, the appellants entitled to the benefit of doubt – Evidence Act, 1872. [Paras 21, 24] Case Law Cited Anil Phukan v. State of Assam [1993] 2 SCR 389 : (1993) 3 SCC 282; Narendrasinh Keshubhai Zala v. State of Gujarat [2023] 2 SCR 746 : 2023 SCC Online 284 – referred to. List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Evidence Act, 1872; Penal Code, 1860. List of Keywords Witness; Hostile; Life Imprisonment; Incised Wound; Murder; Place of incident; Investigation. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 722 of 2012 From the Judgment and Order dated 26.08.2011 of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur in DBCRA No. 639 of 2003 With Criminal Appeal No. 1266 of 2012 [2025] 2 S.C.R. 2103 Abdul Wahid & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellants: Ms. Gouri Karuna Das Mohanti, Snehasish Mukherjee, Ms. Anu Gupta, Sanjay Mani Tripathi, V. Elangovan, Ali Jethmalani, Pawan Kumar Sharma, Ms. Priya Rastogi. Advs. for the Respondent: Irshad Ahmad, Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Milind Kumar. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Ujjal Bhuyan, J. This judgment and order will dispose of Criminal Appeal Nos. 722 and 1266 of 2012. 2. Criminal Appeal No. 722 of 2012 arises out of SLP(Crl.) No. 1764 of 2012 filed by Abdul Wahid and Babu (appellants herein). In this appeal, challenge has been made to the judgment and order dated 26.08.2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench (for short ‘High Court’ hereinafter) in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 639 of 2003 whereby the High Court has upheld the judgment and order dated 10.03.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 4, Kota (‘trial court’ for short) in Sessions C
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.