Latest Judgement Hariram Bhambhi Versus Satyanarayan & Anr. Appeal (Crl.), 1278 of 2021


COURT :  Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

JUDGEMENT NAME : Hariram Bhambhi Versus Satyanarayan & Anr. Appeal (Crl.), 1278 of 2021

JUDGEMENT DATE : Oct 29, 2021


Section 302 – Punishment for murder

Section 201 – Causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender


IMPORTANT PARAGRAPH :  Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J

  1. Leave granted.
  2. On 9 June 2018, the appellant lodged a report at Police Station Kishangarh,

District Ajmer on the basis of which FIR No.116/2018 for offences punishable under

Sections 302 and 201 of the Penal Code was registered. In his complaint, the

appellant stated that on 8 June 2018, his younger brother Ram Niwas had gone out

for carrying out labour work. The appellant was informed by his mother that evening

that Ram Niwas was away to meet his brother-in–law, Kishan Lal, and that he would

not return for the day. On 9 June 2018, Ram Niwas’s spouse informed the appellant

that her brother Kishan Lal had taken Ram Niwas in a vehicle at about 3.00 o’clock.

The local residents informed the appellant that the dead body of Ram Niwas was

thrown out of a vehicle at a specified place in the area of Police Station Kishangarh.

Investigation commenced on the basis of the report lodged by the appellant. Since

the deceased belonged to a Scheduled Caste, offences punishable under the

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 19891

were added. The first respondent was arrested. On 6 September 2018, a final

report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure2 was submitted by the

Investigating Officer against Kishan Lal and three other accused of which the first

respondent was named as A-4.

  1. Aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail by the Sessions Court,

the first respondent moved the High Court of Rajasthan seeking enlargement on


. The complainant was represented by counsel, notice having been given to

him under sub-sections (3) and (5) of 15A of the SC/ST Act. The appeal was

withdrawn on 8 August 2019.

  1. On 25 September 2019, the first respondent instituted an application4 before

the Special Judge, SC/ST (Atrocities Prevention Cases) Ajmer for the grant of bail.

The application for bail was rejected by the Special Judge by an order dated 25

September 2019. The Special Judge noted that the statements of five witnesses –

PW.1 Suresh, PW.2 Smt. Aaram Devi, PW.3 Hari Ram, PW.4 Ramshankar and

PW.5 Gokul Singh were recorded, but certain crucial witnesses were yet to be

examined. Consequently, the second bail application submitted by the first

respondent was rejected. The first respondent instituted an appeal5 before the High

Court against the rejection of a second application for bail. No notice was issued to

the appellant under the provisions of Section 15A of the SC/ST Act.

  1. On 7 November 2019, the High Court heard arguments in the appellate

proceedings6 when it was submitted by counsel for the first respondent that PW.2,

the wife of the deceased, had stated that the deceased had accompanied his

brother-in-law (co-accused Kishan Lal), who had taken an insurance policy in the

name of the deceased and that it was Kishan Lal who had committed the murder

with the help of his friends to obtain the proceeds of the insurance policy. After

recording the above submission of the first respondent, the High Court enlarged the

first respondent on bail by its order dated 7 November 2019.


Download full judgement :- Click Here