NDLI: State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Phoolchand Rathore

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	1860 – ss. 302 and 201 – Acquittal under – Penal Code
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 302 and 201 – Acquittal under – Prosecution rested its case on the circumstances, inter-alia, (a) the accused bore a grudge against his wife for keeping jewellery with her sister (PW8); (b) on the fateful day, during day time, accused on that count, quarrelled with PW8 and threatened to kill the deceased and set the house on fire; (c) in the evening of that fateful day, the accused quarrelled with the deceased and took her with him on a bicycle, while extending threats that he would kill her; (d) later, that evening, the deceased was found in a seriously injured condition; (e) the deceased died on account of those injuries; and (f) blood-stained clothes etc. were recovered at the instance of the accused thereby making the chain complete – Trial Court convicted the accused and death penalty was awarded to the accused – High Court gave accused benefit of doubt to the accused and acquitted him – On appeal, held: Reason of the quarrel that deceased had kept her jewellery with her sister (PW8) was not found proved – As prosecution evidence revealed that jewellery was returned back – Thus, prosecution failed to prove motive – There appears no reason for accused to carry stones from the spot and hide them in his hut and leaving blood-stained stones near railway line – As far as blood stained clothes are concerned, PW4 stated that her father (accused) on return had washed those clothes and spread them to dry – How could they be recovered from hut – So, the recovery of the blood-stained clothes etc. was doubtful – Police prepared two memorandums (disclosure statement, as per the memorandum (Ex. P9), at Seoni Trisection, witnessed by PW6 and the recovery memo (Ex.P-10), was prepared at accused’s hut near railway line at the same time also witnessed by PW-6) – Both memorandums were prepared at the same time and different places, meaning all papers were signed at one go rendering the entire exercise of disclosure and consequential discovery/recovery doubtful – Alleged extra judicial confession made by the accused to PW4 was neither disclosed in the FIR nor in the previous statement of PW4 made during investigation – Extra judicial confession also not proved beyond reasonable doubt – Also, accused and the deceased were noticed quarrelling with each other at about 1630 hours and soon thereafter, the appellant took deceased on his cycle – As per prosecution deceased was found injured at around 2000 hours, there was quite a large time-gap for other intervening factors to operate – Therefore, motive, disclosure, recovery and extra judicial confession was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Constitution of India – Art. 136 – When it appears that the High Court has on an absolutely wrong process of reasoning and a legally erroneous and perverse approach to the facts of the case and ignoring some of the most vital facts, acquitted the respondent and the order of acquittal passed by the High Court has resulted in a grave and substantial miscarriage of justice, extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India may rightfully be exercised.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 444
Petitioner	State Of Madhya Pradesh
Respondent	Phoolchand Rathore
SCR	[2023] 5 S.C.R. 601
Judgement Date	2023-04-28
Case Number	1315-1316

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Phoolchand Rathore

Please Log-in to view this content

Mahavir Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Magan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan

Abdul Sayeed Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Raja@ Rajinder Vs. State of Haryana

State of Maharashtra Vs. Mangi Lal

State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Manmatharaj

Shanti Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan

Gorusu Nagaraju S/o Apparao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Phoolchand Rathore

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Phoolchand Rathore

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Mahavir Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Magan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan

Abdul Sayeed Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Raja@ Rajinder Vs. State of Haryana

State of Maharashtra Vs. Mangi Lal

State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Manmatharaj

Shanti Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan

Gorusu Nagaraju S/o Apparao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Phoolchand Rathore