SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, P.N. BHAGWATI AND R.S. SARKARIA, JJ.
Badri and others, Appellants
Versus
The State of U.P. Respondent,
Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 1972
D/- 29-7-1975,
Advocates Appeared
Mr. D. Mukherjee, Sr. Advocate (Mr. D, Goverdhan, Advocate with him), for Appellants; Mr, O. P. Rana, Advocate, for Respondent,
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 149, 309 and 201 - Appeal against Order of Acquittal - Attempt to Commit Suicide - An incident took place on 26th March, 1967 between appellants 1 and 2 and Tulsi Das on the one hand and one Maddu on the other in which deceased Chet Ram and one Ram Das assisted Maddu by taking him to Police Station and lodging a report against appellants Nos. 1 and 2 and Tulsi Das - This incident, according to prosecution, roused the ire of appellants and Tulsi Das which culminated in attack on deceased Chet Ram on next day - On that day deceased Chet Ram was returning from house of one Vishwa Nath where he had gone for applying Holi Tilak - There was the house of one Laxmi with a courtyard - When these persons were near the house of Laxmi, appellants and Tulsi Das appeared from northern side. Appellants Nos. 1 and 2 were armed with guns, appellants Nos. 3 to 6 with spears, appellant No. 5 with a pharsa, appellant No. 4 with an axe and Tulsi Das with a lathi - Deceased Chet Ram was, at this point of time, a few paces ahead of his companions. Appellant No. 1 accosted deceased Chet Ram and said that he would not let him escape and with these words he fired his gun - Shot hit deceased Chet Ram whereupon he immediately ran into court yard of the house of Laxmi - Appellants and Tulsi Das chased him into courtyard and appellants Nos. 1 and 2 fired their guns at him - Shot hit deceased Chet Ram and he fell down – Held, It is true that she was not named as a witness in the char sheet nor was she called as a witness in the Committing Magistrate s court but that cannot detract from the value of her testimony if otherwise it is found acceptable. It must be remembered that this was a faction ridden village and it is quite probable that this lady was afraid to come and give evidence as she would be incurring the enmity of the faction of Bindaban by doing so - That is perhaps the reason why she was not prepared to come and give evidence and the police accordingly did not mention her name as a witness in chargesheet and the prosecution did not summon her to give evidence in the Committing Magistrate s court - she saw five or six persons assaulting deceased Chet Ram and they were armed with guns, spears, pharsa and axe - It must have taken her hardly a minute or two to rush down and on finding door chained from outside, to run up again and there is little doubt that she, must have seen the rest of the incident after the firing of the gun-shots - In fact it was not suggested to her in cross-examination that she could not have seen any part of the incident. The learned Sessions judge was, therefore, clearly 1991 in error in rejecting the testimony of this lady - High Court rightly accepted her evidence and relied upon it for the purpose of holding the prosecution case established against the appellants - Appeal dismissed.
Judgement
BHAGWATI, J.:- The appellants and one Tulsi Das were charged for offences under Sections 309 and 201 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, The appellants were also charged for offence under Section 148 and Tulsi Das for offence under Section 147. The Sessions Judges, Hamirpur acquitted the appellants and Tulsi Das of all the offences charged against them. The State preferred an appeal against the order of acquittal and the High Court partly allowed the appeal so far as the appellants were concerned and, setting aside the order of acquittal, convicted the appellants of offences under Section 302 read with Section 149 as will as Section 148 and sentenced each of them to suffer life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 and two years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 148 with a direction that both sentences should run conenrrently. The acquittal of the appellants for offence under Section 201 read with Section 149 was confirmed by the High Court and so also was the acquittal of Tulsi Das in respect of the charges preferred against him. Since the acquittal of the appellants in respect of offences under Section 302 read with Section 149 and Sec. 148 was reversed and the appellants were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment by the High Court, the appellants preferred the present appeal under Section 2 (a) of the SC Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970.
2. The incident giving rise to the prosecution in the present case took place in Village Aunta within the jurisdiction of Police Station Rath in Hamirpur District. It is clear from the evidence on record, and that was not disputed by either party, that there were at the material time two factions in this village, one consisting of followers of the previous Pradhan Bindaban and the other consisting of the followers of Ram Sevak who was Pradhan then in the office. There was considerable bitterness and enmity between these two factions and their mutual enmity had already taken twelve lives. The appellants belonged to the faction of Bindaban, while the deceased Chet Ram, who was also known as Karia, and his companions owed allegiance to the faction of Ram Sevak. The prosecution case was that an incident took place on 26th March, 1967 between appellants 1 and 2 and Tulsi Das on the one hand and one Maddu on the other in which the deceased Chet Ram and one Ram Das assisted Maddu by taking him to the Police Station and lodging a report against appellants Nos. 1 and 2 and Tulsi Das. This incident, according to the prosecution, roused the ire of the appellants and Tulsi Das which culminated in the attack on the deceased Chet Ram on the next day, that is 27th March, 1967. On that day at about 3 p. m. the deceased Chet Ram was returning from the house of one Vishwa Nath where he had gone for applying Holi Tilak . He was accompanied by Ram Das, Ganga Din, Balli and Ghanshyam. On the way there was the house of one Laxmi with a courtyard. When these persons were near the house of Laxmi, the appellants and Tulsi Das appeared from the northern side. Appellants Nos. 1 and 2 were armed with guns, appellants Nos. 3 to 6 with spears, appellant No. 5 with a pharsa, appellant No. 4 with an axe and Tulsi Das with a lathi. The deceased Chet Ram was, at this point of time, a few paces ahead of his companions. Appellant No. 1 accosted the deceased Chet Ram and said that he would not let him escape and with these words he fired his gun. The shot hit the deceased Chet Ram whereupon he immediately ran into the court yard (Bakhri) of the house of Laxmi. The appellants and Tulsi Das chased him into the courtyard and appellants Nos. 1 and 2 fired their guns at him. The shot hit the deceased Chet Ram and he fell down. The other appellants then attacked him and gave him blows with the respective weapons in their hands. This was witnessed by Ram Das, Ganga Din, Balli and Ghanshyam who had followed the appellants and were standing at t
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.