SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
28th September 1953
MAHAJAN, B.K. MUKHERJEA AND JAGANNADHA DAS, JJ.
Nawab Singh, Appellant
Versus
The State of U.P.
Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 1953
Advocates appeared
Shri H.J. Umrigar, Advocate, appointed at the expense of the Government, for Appellant; Shri M.H. Faruqi, Advocate, instructed by Shri C.P. Lal, Agent, for the State.
Held: Where in an appeal on special leave in a criminal case, even though a new point was raised for the first time before the Supreme Court in that it was not raised before the High Court either during the hearing of the appeal or even at the time when the appellant applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, even then the Supreme Court can go into the question if found necessary to meet the ends of justice. (In this case the Supreme Court considered the point on facts holding that there was no substance in the point which related to the injuries (0 have been caused by a lethal weapon with which they were alleged to have been caused. - Section 402-Capital sentence-Delay in execution-Facts to be taken into consideration of sentence.
Held: It is true that in proper cases an inordinate delay in the execution of the death sentence may be regarded as a ground for commuting it. But this is not rule of law and is a matter primarily for concentration of the Local Government. If the court has to exercise a discretion in such matter, the other facts of each case will have to be taken into consideration.
Note: In this case it was held that the murder was a cruel and deliberate one and there was no extenuating circumstance whatsoever which would justify the Supreme Court in ordering a commutation of the death sentence.
Judgment
B.K. MUKHERJEA, J.: This appeal, which has come before us on special leave, is directed against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, dated 19th September 1951, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 333 of 1951 by which the learned Judges affirmed, with slight modification, the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Budaum made in Sessions Trial No. 142 of 1950 and upheld the conviction of the appellant under sections 302 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentences of death and transportation for life passed thereunder.
2. The facts of the case lie within a short compass. The prosecution story is that Lalman and Thanni, the two murdered persons, were brothers and belonged to a well-to-do family of traders who were residents of village Kurha Shahpur in the district of Budaun and had a sugar manufactory at the place. Lalman s son is named Itwari. On the day of occurrence, which is 11th of December 1949, at about 5 p.m. in the after noon, while the work was going on in the sugar manufactory which is located in a thatched hut, and Itwari, Thanni and several other persons were present, four people coming from the Northern side arrived on the spot led by the appellant Nawab Singh. They were dressed partly in military uniform. Nawab Singh had a pistol in his hand and of his three companions, one was armed with a pistol, the second with a gun, while the third carried a lathi.
Itwari slipped away from the place as soon as these persons came. Immediately on arrival Nawab Singh, enquired as to where Itwari was. The persons present expressed their ignorance about him and then, it is said, Thanni cried out that Nawab Singh and his gang have come Nawab Singh forthwith took aim at Thanni with his pistol and shot him dead. The report of the gun fire attracted Lalman to the spot and Nawab asked two of his companions, who were posted at the door of Lalman s house, to catch hold of Lalman. This was done and after the hands of Lalman were tied behind his back with his turban, he was moved away from the place and taken to an easterly direction.
Two more gun fires were heard and later on Lalman s body was discovered from a place situated in the East. After the completion of the police investigation, proceedings were started against Nawab Singh, and two of his companions, namely, Rishipal Singh and Chhabram Singh and all the three were committed to the Court of Session and tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun. The Additional Sessions Judge convicted Nawab Singh under sections 302, 302/149 364/149 and also section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to death for murdering Thanni and to transportation for life for kidnapping Lalman with intent to commit murder and for murdering him eventually. There was a further sentence of 3 years rigorous imprisonment imposed upon him on the charge under section 148, Indian Penal Code.
The other two accused were given the benefit of doubt and were acquitted. Thereupon Nawab Singh took an appeal to the High Court of Allahabad and the Sessions Judge also sent up the case to the High Court for confirmation of the death sentence. The High Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge with this modification that the conviction and sentence under section 148. Indian Penal Code were set aside. It is against this judgment that the present appeal has come to this court.
3. The only point, which has been canvassed seriously before us by Mr. Umrigar who appeared in support of the appeal, is that the story put forward by the prosecution, namely, that Thanni was killed by a pistol shot fired by Nawab Singh is materially contradicted by the medical report and the evidence of some of the prosecution witnesses. It is pointed out that the medical report shows that there were a number of gun shot wounds in the body of the victim and in Ex. P-6 it is clearly stated that an empty 12 bore cartridge was recovered from where the body of th
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.