SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
9th December, 1953.
B.K. MUKHERJEA AND BHAGWATI, JJ.
Akhlakali Hayatalli, Appellant
Versus
State of Bombay.
Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 1953.
Advocates appeared
Shri H. J. Umrigar, Advocate (appointed at the Government Expense), for Appellant; Shri Porus A. Mehta, Advocate, instructed by Shri G. H. Rajadhyaksha, Agent, for Respondent.
Held: The High Court will only interfere with the verdict of the jury if it finds the verdict "perverse" in the sense of being "unreasonable", "manifestly wrong," or "against the weight of evidence." If the facts and circumstances of the case are such that a reasonable body of men could arrive at the one conclusion or the other, it is not competent to the Sessions Judge or the High Court to substitute their verdict in place of the verdict which has been given by the jury. The jury are the sole judges of the facts and it is the right of the accused to have the benefit of the verdict of jury. Even if the Sessions Judge or the High Court could if left to themselves have arrived at a different verdict it is not competent to the Sessions Judge to make a reference nor the High Court to accept the same and substitute their own verdict for the verdict of the jury provided the verdict was such as could be arrived at by a reasonable body of men on the facts and circumstances of the case.1
," Six out of the nine jurors came to the conclusion that the Appellant was not guilty of the offence with which he was charged. Three out of the nine jourors came to an opposite conclusion and it is impossible in the circumstances of the case for us to characterise the one or the other of the conclusion reached by the members of the jury as perverse in the sense of being unreasonable or manifestly wrong or against the weight of evidence. The verdict reached by the majority was certainly a verdict which upon the evidence on record a reasonable body of men could have reached and in our opinion the reference was not competent" (per Bbagawati J)
Judgment
BHAGWATI, J. : This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay accepting the reference made by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay under S. 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and convicting the Appellant of an offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to four years rigorous imprisonment.
2. The case of the prosecution was that at or about 10-30 or 11 P. M. on the 25th August 1951, the complainant Abdul Satar was going towards Dhobi Galli through the Bibijan Street. At the junction of the Chakla Street with Bibijan Street, he was attacked by the Appellant. The appellant first attempted to strike him on his right shoulder, but Abdul Satar caught hold of his hand. The Appellant released his hand from the grip of Abdul Satar went in front of him and stabbed him in two places - one injury was inflicted at the level of 9th and 10th ribs on the left side and the other injury on the left shoulder. The Appellant then ran away and was pursued by several people.
Babu Adam saw him at the corner of the Chakla Street and the Masjid Bunder Road and joined the pursuit. Sub-Inspector Chawan joined the crowed chasing the Appellant in the Dhobi Street, and ultimately the Appellant was caught at the junction of Dhobi Street and the Nagdevi Street. The Appellant was then taken to the Police Station. He was taken by the Police Officers to the place where the attack took place and a panchnama of the scene of the offence was made at five minutes past one on the 26th August 1951. The appellant and the police-Officers returned to the Police Station and at 1-30 A. M. that is within half an hour, another panchnama was made in respect of the clothes which the Appellant was wearing. According to that panchnama there were blood stains on the right arm pit, on the front side of the shirt and on the right thigh. There were also blood stains on the right side collar and on the back of the shirt.
3. The defence put up by the Appellant was that he was a fruit broker and after collecting his dues from the Crawford Market up to 11 P. M., he came to the corner of Dhobi Street, when he heard the shouts, "chor, chor" and he also then shouted "chor,chor" and ran after the person who was running away in order to catch him. When he reached the junction of Nagdevi Cross Street he fell down and the person who was running ahead of him rushed into a gutter. As he was ahead and members of the public were following him, three or four of them fell on his body after he fell down and when he got up he was caught by two or three other persons who all said that he was the man, sub-Inspector Chawan was one of these persons. Chawan was suspected to be his accomplice, but someone said that he was a police officer and Chawan was then released. The Appellant was put into the police pilot car which came along and takes to the police station.
He was then taken to the scene of the offence and a panchnama was drawn there. He was again brought to the police station thereafter and was made to sit in the charge room. As he was feeling very hot he removed his shirt and kept it by his side. In the meanwhile, a police constable came there and gave him a blow on his nose saying, "Do you think this is your father s residence that you removed your shirt?" He thereupon started bleeding from his nose, and due to that bleeding his shirt and trousers were stained with blood. The same constable then asked him to put on the clothes and took him to his officer. He produced the Appellant before I. D. Kakatkar, who then noticed his clothes. The panchas were then called and a panchnama was drawn up in which the blood stains on the shirt and trousers were noted.
4. The Appellant was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge and a common jury. The prosecution called the evidence of the complainant Abdul Satar, Babu Adam and Sub-Inspector Chawan. Evidence was led of an identification parade which was held in the hospital where
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.