SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1972 Supreme(SC) 382

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.M. SHELAT, I.D. DUA AND H.R. KHANNA, JJ.
Sheoram Singh and another, Appellants
Versus
State of U.P., Respondent.
Cri. Appeal No. 215 of 1969, D/- 24-8-1972.
Advocates appeared
M/s. J. P. Goyal and S. M. Jain, Advocates, for Appellants; Mr. D. P. Uniyal, Sr. Advocate (M/s. V. Mayakrishnan and O. P. Rana, Advocates, with him), for Respondent.

Advocates:
D.P.UMYAL, J.P.GOYAL, O.P.RANA, S.M.Jain, V.MAYA KRISHNAN

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 – Article 136 – Indian Penal Code,1860 – Section 302 r/w 149,307 r/w 149,148,147,138 and 34 Causing injury – Offence of murder - Prosecution case is that some accused were inimical towards said one as he was taking interest in a magisterial enquiry relating to death in police custody of one who had been severely beaten by aforesaid accused before his arrest by the police - It is stated, (PW 4) was sitting in front of his house in village - (PW 1)and his cousin were sitting in courtyard in front of their house beneath a tree - Houses of said one are close to each other - Two tried to pacify accused and asked them not to quarrel on that day as it was a day which follows Deepawali - Accused then stood at a short distance from house - Deceased, who was brother of said one was inside house at that time – Held, learned counsel on behalf of State has urged that even if conviction of said one for offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained, he is guilty of offence under Section 302 read with S. 34 Indian Penal Code because circumstances of case show that fired that shot at in furtherance of common intention of said one - This submission, in our opinion, is not well founded - It is undeniable that common intention can develop during course of an occurrence, but there has to be cogent material on the basis of which the court can arrive at that finding and hold an accused vicariously liable for the act of other accused by invoking Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code - As a result of the above, we accept the appeal of said one to the extent of setting aside his conviction and sentence for offence under Section 302 read with S. 149 Indian Penal Code - In other respects the appeal of Said one is dismissed - Appeal regarding Jumman has both been pressed and is dismissed - Appeal Partly allowed.

Judgment

KHANNA, J.:- Arjun Singh (47), his son Sheoram Singh alias Bhure Singh (27), Jagatpal Singh (29), Ganga Deen (29), Ram Nath (39), Sheo Prasad (30) and Jumman (30) were tried in the court of Additional Sessions Judge Unnao for offences under Section 302, Section 302 read with Section 149, Section 307, Section 307 read with S. 149, Section 148 and Section 147 Indian Penal Code and were acquitted. On appeal by the State of Uttar Pradesh, the Allahabad High Court convicted Arjun Singh under Section 302, Section 307 read with Section 149, and Section 138 Indian Penal Code, and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life on the first count, rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years on the second count and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years on the third count. Sheoram Singh was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149, Section 307 and Section 148 Indian Penal Code, and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life on the first count, rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years on the second count and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years on the third count. The remaining accused were convicted under Section 307 read with Section 149, and Section 147 Indian Penal Code, and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years on the first count and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year on the second count. The sentences in the case of each of the accused were ordered to run concurrently. Arjun Singh, Sheoram Singh and Jumman thereafter applied to this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution for special leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court. This Court declined to grant leave to Arjun Singh and dismissed the application in so far as it related to him. Sheoram Singh and Jumman were granted leave "limited to the section under which they can be convicted including the applicability of Sections 34and 149 Indian Penal Code".

2. The prosecution case is that Arjun Singh, Jumman, Ganga Deen and Sheo Prasad accused were inimical towards Ram Dularey Singh as he was taking interest in a magisterial enquiry relating to the death in police custody of one Jameel who had been severely beaten by the aforesaid accused in Sirosi before his arrest by the police. On November 4, 1964 at about 4.30 p.m. it is stated, Ram Dularey Singh (PW 4) was sitting in front of his house in village Chilaula. Rampal Singh (PW 1)and his cousin Chandrapal Singh were sitting in the courtyard in front of their house beneath a tree. The houses of Rampal Singh and Ram Dularey Singh are close to each other. The seven accused then came there. Out of them, Arjun Singh and Sheoram Singh were armed with guns, while the remaining accused carried lathis, Arjun Singh the shouted to his companions to kill Ram Dularey Singh. Ram Dyularey Singh raised alarm and rushed towards then house of Rampal Singh and closed the door from inside. Rampal Singh and Chandrapal Singh tried to pacify the accused and asked them not to quarrel on that day as it was a day of Paraiva which follows Deepawali. The accused then stood at a short distance from the house of Ram Dularey Singh. Har Narain Singh deceased, who was brother of Chandrapal Singh was inside the house at that time. Har Narain Singh along with Ram Dularey Singh then went to the eastern roof of the house. Har Narain Singh too asked the accused to abstain from abusing Ram Dularely Singh. Arjun Singh then asked. Har Narain Singh to turn out Ram Dularely Singh from his house. When Har Narain Singh declined, Arjun Singh shouted that it would be bad for him also. On the instigation of the other accused. Arjun Singh then fired his gun at Har Narain Singh. Sheoram Singh immediately thereafter fired at Ram Dularey Singh. Both Har Narain Singh and Ram Dularey Singh fell down on the roof on receipt of gun shot injuries. The accused then ran away. The occurrence, it is stated, was witnessed by Rampal Singh (PW 1), Raghunandan Pandey (PW 2)







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top