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

1978 Supreme(SC) 49

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND P.N. SHINGHAL, JJ.
Rameshwar Dayal and others etc., Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. Respondent.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 241-242 of 1972
Decided on 15-2-1978.
Advocate Appeared
M/s. R. K. Garg, S. C. Agarwala and A. P. Gupta Advocates, for Appellants; Mr. O. P. Rana Advocate, for Respondent; Mr. D. Mookerjee, Sr. Advocate (Mr. R. K. Bhatt Advocate with him) for Intervener.

Advocates:
A.P.Gupta, D.MUKHERJI, R.K.BHATTACHARJI, R.K.GARG, S.C.AGRAWAL

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 107/117 – Indian Penal Code 1860 – Section 147- Injury - Charge-sheet – Offence of murder - Unfortunate occurrence which resulted in death of deceased is an outcome of an outstanding enmity court two parties - Both High Court and Sessions Judge have clearly spelt out essential features prosecution case and it not necessary for us to repeat same with all its details - It appears that apart from long outstanding enmity court parties immediate provocation for occurrence was that proceedings under Section had been initiated by against each other and court pending in Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate - In these proceedings a number of persons figured as parties on both sides was date fixed for giving evidence in proceedings which had been initiated against accused persons on basis of an application given by deceased - Leader faction against whom proceedings had been started – Held, Documentary evidence and circumstances mentioned above court find ourselves in complete agreement with view taken by courts below that what had been recovered at spot by Investigating Officer court four live cartridges which had fallen at spot when bag deceased was taken away by appellants - Court are unable to find any reliable evidence to prove that four cartridges found at spot court empty cartridges - Argument of counsel for appellants to contrary must be overruled - Great reliance was placed by appellants on an application given by son of deceased Court at Bareilly informing court that had been murdered - This application is and was filed before Magistrate - It is true that in this application it was mentioned that had been murdered but neither names appellants nor circumstances under which he was murdered have been mentioned - It was argued by that absence names of appellants clearly court that deceased was murdered by unknown persons and therefore only fact of his murder was mentioned in this application - Appears to be attractive but on closer scrutiny it is without any substance had already rushed to police station to lodge FIR - Wherein he had narrated facts which led to death of deceased - son of deceased who had been sent to Bareilly was sent limited purpose of informing court regarding death of - In proceedings under S - 107 there was no occasion for mentioning name of assailants of or for detailing circumstances under which he was killed because that was not germane for proceedings - In these circumstances therefore absence of name of assailant in this application cannot put prosecution out of Court - Appeals dismissed

JUDGMENT

S. M. FAZAL ALI, J.:— These two criminal appeals by special leave are directed against a common judgment dated 1st August, 1972 of the Allahabad High Court upholding the conviction and sentences imposed by the Sessions Judge, Bareilly on the appellants.

2. In Criminal Appeal No. 241 of 1972 there was seven appellants, viz., Rameshwar Dayal, Acchmal, Janmejaya, Rohan, Reghunandan, Ram Das and Sudama. In Criminal Appeal No. 242 of 1972 there are two appellants, viz., Rohtas and Sukhdev. All the appellants were convicted under S. 302/149, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Rameshwar Dayal, Achhmal Ram, Janmejaya Deo, Rohtas, Sudama, Ramdas, Raghunandan and Rohan were further convicted under S. 324 read with S. 149, I.P.C. and sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment. Sukhdev was also convicted under S. 324 whereas Rameshwar Dayal and Janmejaya Deo were convicted under S. 394, I.P.C. and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment. Rameshwar Dayal, Achhmal Ram, Janmejaya Deo, Rohtas, Sukhdeo and Sudama were further convicted under S. 148, I.P.C. and sentenced to 18 months rigorous imprisonment whereas Ramdas, Raghunandan and Rohan were convicted under S. 147, I.P.C. and sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment. The High Court on appeal affirmed the conviction and sentences indicated above.

3. The unfortunate occurrence which resulted in the death of the deceased is an outcome of an outstanding enmity between the two parties. Both the High Court and the Sessions Judge have clearly spelt out the essential features of the prosecution case and it is not necessary for us to repeat the same with all its details. It appears that apart from the long outstanding enmity between the parties the immediate provocation for the occurrence was that proceedings under Section 107/117 Cr. P. C. had been initiated by Babu Ram and Munnalal against each other, and were pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Faridpur. In these proceedings a number of persons figured as parties on both sides. 9th December, 1969 was the date fixed for giving evidence in the proceedings under S. 107/117 Cr. P. C. which had been initiated against the accused persons on the basis of an application given by the deceased Babu Ram. The leader of the faction against whom the proceedings had been started was Munnalal.

4. Babu Ram along with his companions left for Faridpur and when he reached near the field of one Laltu Nut, he was surrounded by the appellants who were lying in wait for him in the bushes and who on seeing the accused and his party emerged and started abusing him right and left. Of the accused persons Rameshwar Dayal was armed with a single barrel gun, Achhmal Ram with a double barrel gun, Janmejaya Deo with a country made pistol and the others were variously armed with spears, Kantas and lathis. Rameshwar Dayal fired his gun at the deceased and Janmejaya fired another shot at the deceased from his pistol simultaneously. Babu Ram fell down as a result of the injuries received by him. Sukhdeo intercepted Chhoteylal when he wanted to protect his brother and inflicted a spear injury on him. Virendra and others who were accompanying the deceased raised an alaram at which Achhmal fired a shot at them which did not hit them. Meanwhile, Rameshwar Dayal snatched away a bag from the belt of the deceased containing his licensed revolver and cartridges and Janmejaya Deo picked up the cloth bag in which the deceased was carrying the papers relating to the proceedings under S. 107/117 Cr. P. C.which was fixed on 9th Dec. 1969, the day of the occurrence. Thereafter, the appellants made good their escape by running away towards the south. A narrative regarding the manner in which the occurrence took place was jotted down by P. W. 1 Rajendra, son of the deceased at the spot and he carried the same to the Police Station Fatehganj, a mile from the scene of the occurrence where the F.I.R. was lodged at 8 a.m. on the basis of which a case w












































































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