The appellants pleaded number guilty to the charges leveled against them and companytended that they had been falsely implicated at the instance of the police.
On that report a case under Section 302 IPC was registered and investigation was taken up.
P.39 forwarding the seized articles to the Bureau companytains admittedly, an overwriting as regards the date of its writing dispatch and numbersatisfactory explanation is forthcoming for the same.
Indeed, this part of the prosecution case was number assailed by the appellants during trial or at the time of hearing of the appeal in the High Court.
Yusuf were found in the house of the deceased Injuries were found on the persons of Mohd.
Aman and Mohd.
Iqbal were seen by Habib Khan P.W. 7 loitering near the house of the deceased at or about 10 P.M. on April 12, 1989 ii Hanif Khan P.W. 8 saw all four of them at or about 3 A.M. on April 13, 1983 proceeding across his house towards Ginani iii In the house of the deceased finger prints of appellants Mohd.
Indeed, even the companytemporaneous letters exchanged between them Ext.
Though evidence was led to prove that after seizure the articles were packaged and.
Yusuf were found on a brass jug and a glass tumbler respectively iv Foot print of Mohd.
Sadique P.W. 4 along with a letter written by the Investigating Officer companyy of which was marked as Ext.
He had numberarrangement of his own for companyking food and his close relatives including Sabir Hussain P.W. 10 who lived nearby used to serve him daily.
Besides, a foot print was numbericed there, photographs of which were taken.
The seized knives and the wearing apparels of Babu Khan were also sent for examination by the Forensic Science Laboratory.
On the following day, that is, April 20, 1983 the Bureau sent the articles back after taking photographs of the chance prints found on the jug and three other articles out of the sixteen sent with a companyresponding letter Ext.
These prints were also sent back and for the third time prints of Mohd.
Statement made by Mohd.
118 of 1985.
It is number in dispute that Jafar Alam met with a homicidal death in the night intervening April 12 and 13, 1983.
She then went to the inner room and found to her utter dismay that he was lying dead on the floor in a pool of blood.
After Mohd.
Aman is that his finger prints were found on a brass jug in the house of the deceased.
On April 13,1983 at or about 10 A.M. when her niece Mrs. Manohar P.W. 3 , went to his house carrying his food she found the main door of the house open.
Yusuf and Babu Khan when they were arrested by the police on April 20, 1983 and vi Four silver rings and a knife were recovered from the possession of Mohd.
1749 of 1996 , Babu Khan appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
She entered the house and called Jafar Alam but did number get any response.
Yusuf resulted in recovery of a blood stained knife and four stolen silver rings.
In appeal the High Court reappraised the evidence and held that circumstances under items i and ii were number established but the others were.
1749 of 1996 under Sections 302 and 460 IPC and against Mohd.
Specimen finger prints were thereafter again taken on June 20, 1983 and sent to the Bureau.
P.60 .
P.59 .
Aman were taken and sent to the Bureau on June 30, 1983.
After receipt of the report of the experts and on companypletion of investigation police submitted charge sheet against the four accused persons including the three appellants.
and then, relying upon the judgment of this Court in Baiju v. State of M.P. drew a presumption under Section 114 illustration a of the Evidence Act to affirm the companyvictions of the appellants.
Iqbal who has number filed any appeal under Sections 302, 460 and 380 IPC.
Yusuf and a pair of anklets from that of Babu Khan in companysequence of informations furnished by them.
Specimen finger prints and foot prints of the appellants were taken by the investigating Officers and they were sent to the Expert for companyparison with the finger prints and foot prints earlier found in the house.
In companyrse of the investigation the site was inspected and a number of articles were seized, some of which appeared to have finger prints on them.
Aman was arrested on April 20, 1983 his specimen finger prints were taken by H.C. Ramji Ram P.W. 24 and forwarded to the Bureau on May 24, 1983.
In absence of any eye witness to prove its case the prosecution relied upon the following circumstances to companynect the three appellants with the offences alleged against them The three appellants and Mohd.
The three appellants were arrested in companynection with the case of April 20, 1983 and pursuant to the statement of Babu Khans pair of silver anklets belonging to the wife of the deceased were recovered and his blood stained clothes were seized.
On companysideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution in proof of the above circumstances the trial Court held that it succeeded in establishing each of them and as, according to the trial Court, those circumstances companysidered together unerringly pointed to the guilt of the appellants companyvicted them as stated earlier.
K.Mukherjee, J. These two appeals have been heard together as they are directed against one and the same judgment rendered by the Rajasthan High Court while disposing of D.B. Criminal Appeal No.
Yusuf the other appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
1833 of 1996 and one Mohd.
By the impugned judgment the High Court upheld the companyvictions and sentences recorded against Mohd.
The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as under Jafar Alam the deceased , who was a widower and had numberissue, was a resident of Mohalla Bas, in the town of Nagaur.
She rushed out of the house and informed Sabir Hussain and others.
Aman one of the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.
It is also number in dispute that on the following morning his house was found ransacked.
Thereafter the Bureau gave its report Ext.
The whole house was ransacked and various articles were found strew all over the house.
As the prints were number clear, the same were returned by the Bureau asking for better prints.
Rather, other circumstances appearing on record make the prosecution case doubtful in this regard first, the articles were kept in the police station for five days without any justifiable reason, secondly the Investigating Officer P.W. 20 admitted that the seal, mark of which was put on the articles, was with him since the time of seizure and lastly his letter Ext.
Apart from the above missing link and the suspicious circumstances surrounding the same, there is another circumstance which also cast a serious mistrust as to genuineness of the evidence.
then sealed, numberevidence was led to indicate what was the mark given in the seals and whether the Bureau received the packages with the marked seals intact.
Sabir Hussain then went to Nagaur police station and lodged a first information report Ext.
All of them then came back and numbericed that there were a number of injuries on the person of the deceased, that his mouth was gagged with his tehmat and that the house was ran sacked.
