High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-A/2052/2018dismissed

Manoj Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Another

2022-10-21Mrs. Justice Lisa Gill,Mr. Justice Harsh Bunger14 pages

!"#$# %& '

' % ( )*+, ''''''--.#"% --!..% / !

,0% %1 % 2!, '''''' !$- %1!% $ & 3 4 /'/ 4/ 44 5 4 ' / /

4/ 446 ,.'

! "#$ #% '#&( )#'*)" + , - ./ 0 + 1+ &'

#$ '#&2 3 - 4+ ./ /3 5 '6 + + )#'

. 31 #% '#&( 175&%+/ / 8 /0/ +/ 3 3 / 3+ +/ +9 : 0 1 +/ 3+ / + ;< 7)*/ !13/ 3 +/ 03

1 ;< 7"* /

18 575$ /

18 3/9#":+ / / / / 8 9: / / = 1 8 #% '#&( 8 0 &#* &# )#

0/ 8 + / 4+ . + 8

+ + / + + 6 &'

)# * & ##

8 8 +/ +6 & )#*'

1 8 0/ 3 /

0/ 3+ / // + / 4 1 8 < 0 3 3+

9 : + 3 >0 ? 3 /0/ 18 3 > 3 / / + 9 : + 0 ? + 0+

! "#$ #% '#&( ;< 5&#* / + 13 4 6 &$" 9 @

>: ;< 7%* / / #$ '#&( ? ./ , +

7 +* / 0 3 3

;< 7A* ;< 5&"* 3< + ;< &( #) '#&% ;< B ; 3 / +03 < ') # +C 3

1 8 +"#33 / + #% '#&( 6 / + / 3++ 3 /+

/ 0 3/ 0 0 0

&$)

/ + , /

#$ #& '#&% + )#'*)" / + ' )# #) '#&% / + 3 3 / /< 3

)&)

/ / / 3+ + 3 ' 3 , / 0// 6 / + + < 6 ' / / / <

8 3 D + + ' 3 3 6 + + +

/ + / 3

3 '

++ * 0 + +1+ &'

#$ '#&23 - 4+./ D 3 + '

/ / 75( % 3 8 .

/ < 1 75&&5 + / / 3 D 3 / 3 , 3 /+3+3 > 3 3 + 1+ &'

#$ '#&2 3 - 4+ ./ / ' )#' +3 7 +

+ / 3 / + + 3 0 3 + 3 + / +3 1+ ?> /2,1 #,12# 2%1 /,1 9$ / ! 2,$2 ,6 :

8 ; /*<,+%0 =$' / !

),% >6 ,#+#%. --!. % ' 8

6 1!"#1!1 % 7'

' %1 9#%1!, /#%?2 @ )>* =$' / !

*%(<6 ,#+#%. --!. '

:6 1!"#1!1 % 8''',?> 9#%1!, /#%?2 @ )>*5$9: 5 "Hence, in order to sustain a conviction, it is imperative that the chain of circumstances is complete, cogent and coherent. This court has consistently held in a long line of cases [See Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan AIR (1977 SC 1063); Eradu and Ors. v. State of Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 316); Earabhadrappa @ Krishnappa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1983 SC 446); State of U.P. v. Sukhbasi and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 1224); Balwinder Singh @ Dalbir Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350); Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P.

(AIR 1989 SC 1890)] that where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused. The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.

; Ram v. State of Punjab (AIR 1954 SC 621), it was laid down that where the case depends upon the conclusion drawn from circumstances, the cumulative effect of the circumstances must be such as to negate the innocence of the accused and bring the offence home beyond any reasonable doubt. We may also make a reference to a decision of this Court in C. Chenga Reddy and Ors. v. State of A.P. (1996) 10 SCC 193, wherein it has been observed that:

"In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the settled law is that the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is drawn should be fully proved and such circumstances must be conclusive in nature.

Moreover, all the circumstances should be complete and there should be no gap left in the chain of evidence. Further the proved circumstances must be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence....". [Emphasis supplied]"

, ?> /*<,+%05$ $*-, + 1+ /2,1 #,12# 2%1 /,1> $*-, 5 E,/ + + 1+ 3 ,/ , // / / 3

3 6 3 / 3 + F

A ?+ 3 G+ / 3

8 3 '

3/ 3 + , 5 4/ / = '

3 75(5 8 75%. / 3 '

. 8 + / . + + 75&' H - 1 3 75% . + 3 / / 3 #$ '#&( 3 + ,< /3/ /

3+ / 75( 75% #% '#&( 3 + #% '#&( / 3 3 / 75(5 8 #% '#&( A ##

/ 5 6/

+ 2#*5 8 6 /+ 06 ' 8

8 &'

)#*& ##

75%5. #% '#&( &&*&'

## / / + / / ' + + / 0+ / +++ ' / + / 0 + + 75% + / 3 0 3 / 6 75% / 2*2 )#

0/ /3 #$ '#&( 75% + &# '#&( / + + + ;< 7%* ++ ' &) '#&( ;< 7%*.

' + +/ / / / 0 3 ;< 7%*

75(5 8 /+6/ A ##

+ 6 0+ 0 / 0 6 ' 75( &' )#*& ##

0+ '

75% / + / ' + + &&*&'

: / ++ / ++ + , +3 / 75%/ 3 / &&&'75( '* 8 + 06 75(5 8 &'

)#*& ##

75(5 8 3 3 0 0 / '

+ 3 ++ 3 6 / 75% . / / ++ / + + ?/ 75 &% 1 /3 / 3/ 3+/ / 3/+ ;< 7"*< / / 3

+/ 75( 8 4+/ +6 #% '#&( &'

)#* & ##

0/ 4+. + < &%&

3 D + 3 75( 75% 3 3 , / 3 '

B 4 //

//4 / / ' 4 /

& / 3+3 '

75&& / 3 ?/ + 1 + 3 ' / 75&& + #$ '#&( 75&& / / + #$ '#&( $ ##

/+#% '#&( '

3+ / + / / #A '#&( 75&& + / 55/ @+ > ! + 3 75&& /3 /+

75&& ! +3/3 // +

,+ 375&& 3 3 3 3 + 3 3 75&& #$ '#&( $ ##

+ 75&&

&%&

//#2 '#&( 2 )#

, < /375&&

3 + 3 75&& 3 + /

0 / '"/ + 3 < 1/0 3 < / 3 75&&

/ '( ; 3 '$ ; +/ 33 + / 3 3 0+ / 3 +3 1 , / 3/ 0/+ + / / 3 D 3 +3 ;< 72*.

;< 7%*/ )* ) )#

0/ 8 / /3+ + + 3 - +

+ &"

'$#% '#&( 3 + / / + ! / / 3 6 3 + ! < * / + 5 75&' - 1 +3 / + + 3 /1 + ? 3 =& D + 3/ 75% / +++ / '

D 3 / 3 / ' 3 + H 63

7 3 ' /0 3

75% / ++ + / '

3 ?> /*<,+%05$ 9:

3 0 / + < + 3 + / + 0+ 3 63/ 6 / + 3 + 3 6 3 + / + / +1+ 6 3 / + + 1 3 3 ++3 ?

> / !

120 ,1!$2 =$'

""2*1$ @

.,+ %1 2!,$6 A: / 76 2?C% /#%?2 =$' / !

'6 77 / %1 2+1 )2% 2!>2% 9$' / !

*(, 6 8 8 / :'

8 3 + + / +1+ &'

#$ '#&23 - 4+.//3 ' 6 + +

8+/ +3 94/ 44: / "

<!, 6 '

0 7 0+* I*! 7

I*!