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

1987 Supreme(SC) 425

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.M. DUTT AND S. NATARAJAN, JJ.
Subash and Shiv Shankar, Appellants
Versus
State of U.P., Respondent
Criminal Appeals Nos. 287-288 of 1978, D/- 14-4-1987.
Advocates appeared :
Mr. Frank Anthony, Sr. Advocate; Mr. Sushil Kumar and Mr. J. K. Das, Advocates with him, for Appellant in Crl. A. No. 287 of 1978; Mr. U. R. Lalit, Sr. Advocate; Mr. S. K. Bisarai and Mr. A. D. Malhotra, Advocates with him, for Appellant in Crl. A. No. 288 of 1978; Mr. Prithvi Raj, Sr. Advocate; Mr. C. P. Mittal and Mr. Dalveer Bhandari, Advocates with him, for Respondent.

Advocates:
A.D.Malhotra, C.P.Mittal, DALVIR BHANDARI, FRANK ANTHONY, J.K.DAS, Prithvi Raj, S.K.Bisaria, SUSHIL JAIN, U.R.Lalit

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 – Section 302 read with Section 34 – Appeal Against Convictions - Nature to cause death – Offence of Murder - Question were committed on March a day after Holi Festival at about on Bareilly Road in Bareilly - Prosecution case was that while caught hold and Om Kumar repeatedly stabbed him with knives and caused fatal injuries to him - When tried to intercede he was also stabbed by and caused an injury - Besides occurrence was witnessed by an uncle of and some others were taken to hospital but was pronounced dead in the hospital - Motive for the occurrence was that about days prior to the occurrence had given a machine part to being welded but failed to carry out the work nevertheless he refused to return machine part without the repair charges being paid to him - Refused to pay charges and there was an altercation but the parties were pacified by and took away the machine part without paying any charges to quarrel had taken place about days before occurrence – Held, Even though the other accused are acquitted it is only for want of proof of their identity and not because eyewitnesses had not seen occurrence or that occurrence had taken place in a different manner cannot therefore escape consequences of attack jointly committed by him and his accomplices in furtherance of their common intention even though the other accused stand acquitted for want of acceptable proof of their identity referred us to the decision in State of Gujarat AIR SC to contend that when the other accused stand acquitted also should be acquitted of the charge under S. 302 read with S. 34, Penal Code - Facts in that case bear no comparison with the facts in this case - On other hand State of U.P AIR SC will be decision apt for consideration in this case - Order accordingly.

Judgement

NATARAJAN, J.:- These appeals by special leave arise out of a common judgment rendered by the Allahabad High Court in three Criminal appeals filed before it by the appellants and one Raj Kishore. Appellant Subash and appellant Shiv Shankar were convicted along with Raj Kishore by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly under S. 302 read with S. 34, Penal Code and S. 324 read with S. 34, Indian Penal Code respectively for having committed the murder of one Ram Babu and for having caused hurt with a knife to witness Dinesh Shankar. For the said convictions they were awarded imprisonment for life and three years R. I., respectively and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. One Om Kumar who was also sent up for sessions trial under the two charges mentioned above was acquitted by the Sessions Judge. The three convicted persons preferred appeals to the High Court and the High Court has confirmed the convictions and sentences awarded to Subash and Shiv Shankar but acquitted Raj Kishore.

2. The offences in question were committed on March 12,1971 i.e., a day after Holi Festival at about 11 a.m. on the Bareilly-Nainital Road in Bareilly. The prosecution case was that while Shiv Shankar caught hold of Ram Babu, Subash, Raj Kishore and Om Kumar repeatedly stabbed him with knives and caused fatal injuries to him. When Dinesh Shankar (P.W. 2) tried to intercede he was also stabbed by Subash and caused an injury. Besides, Dinesh Shankar (P.W. 2) the occurrence was witnessed by an uncle of Ram Babu viz. Budh Sen (P.W. 1) and Shyam Behari (PW3) and some others. Ram Babu and Dinesh Shankar were taken to the hospital but Ram Babu was pronounced dead in the hospital. The motive for the occurrence was that about 15 or 20 days prior to the occurrence Ram Babu had given a machine part to Subash for being welded but Subash failed to carry out the work; nevertheless he refused to return the machine part without the repair charges being paid to him. Ram Babu refused to pay the charges and there was an altercation but the parties were pacified by Dinesh Shankar and Ram Babu took away the machine part without paying any charges to Subash. The quarrel had taken place about 3 or 4 days before the occurrence. Bearing this grudge in mind, when Ram Babu, accompanied by Budh Sen and Dinesh Shankar was proceeding to Qutabkhana to witness the Holi celebrations, Subash assisted by his three companions attacked Ram Babu in the manner set out earlier and caused fatal injuries to him. There were as many as 14 injuries on Ram Babu among which 7 were punctured wounds. Among the punctured wounds, injuries Nos. 7 and 8 were deep injuries which had injured the pleura, left lung, pericardium and the heart. These, injuries were certified to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Dinesh Shankar (P.W. 2) also had sustained an incised wound on his left thigh.

3. Budh Sen (PW1) got a report Exhibit Kha 1 written by his son and presented it at the Police Station at 1.12 p.m. Therein he had stated that accused Subash was known to him but the other three assailants were not known to him but another witness Bhuvan Chand examined as C.W . 1, had informed him that one Raja Ram was one of the assailants of Ram Babu. It would appear that subsequently Bhuvan Chand refused to testify out of fear of the accused and hence he was not cited as a witness in the charge-sheet. Even so, having regard to the averments in Exhibit Kha 1, the Sessions Judge examined Bhuvan Chand as a court witness. He, however, failed to corroborate Budh Sen and stated that he did not know anything about the occurrence.

4. Subash was absconding and he surrendered before the court on 12-3-71. He was subsequently questioned by the Investigating Officer and he gave information regarding the names and addresses of the other three assailants. Raj Kishore was arrested on 23-5-1971 and Shiv Shankar was arrested on 14-6-71 from the office of the Central Excise, Bareilly where h


















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