SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M. M. Punchhi, M. Srinivasan
OMWATI (SMT) AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS
Versus
MAHENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS, RESPONDENTS.
Criminal Appeals No. 25 of 1990 with Nos. 312-13 of 1990 (From the Judgment and Order dated 10-10-1988 of the Allahabad High Court in Crl. As. Nos. 806 and 827 of 1988), decided on November 7, 1997.
K. B. Sinha, Senior Advocate (Ashok Kumar Sharma, H. S. Kaicker, Pramod Swarup, R. K. Singh, A. S. Pundir, R. S. Sodhi, David Rao and Indeevar Goodwill, Advocates, with him) for the appearing parties.
Indian Penal Cosde,1860 - Sections 148, 302,149, 307,149 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 161 - Murder Case - Appeal against conviction - Sohan Pal Singh and his son as well as one were going on motorcycle of first of them from Village Bilari to Village Chawra - At same time and his son were proceeding on another motorcycle along with them - At about when they reached Village Bonda Ferozepur they saw a tractor parked on middle of road with its lights on - It had no bonnet - Accused namely were standing near tractor - One of them namely had a hasiya while others had country-made pistols - Motorcycle of was stopped on seeing aforesaid persons on road and other motorcycle was stopped a few steps behind - Accused who had pistols fired at - Former fell down on receiving gunshot injuries - Assaulted him with hasiya and gave several blows - Started running away but was chased by accused - Another tractor came from behind which was stopped by - Attempted to climb on said tractor but accused fired at him as a result of which he received gunshot injuries and fell down - His son who had come on said tractor also got injuries when they tried to save - Some other persons who had come on said tractor ran away - Both died on spot as a result of injuries - In meantime villagers came from village and accused boarded their tractor and tried to escape - Tractor got stuck in ditch and accused left it and ran away - FIR was lodged by at Police Station Kurh Fatehgarh at same day - Accused were not traceable for three or four days - Three of them surrendered in court at Moradabad and remaining three persons surrendered - They pleaded not guilty and stated that they were falsely implicated on account of enmity - One of them namely stated that at time of occurrence he was on duty in cooperative bank at Moradabad and in support of his claim he examined Branch Manager as - Prosecution examined ten witnesses - Claimed to be eyewitnesses - Additional Sessions Judge found all accused to be guilty and convicted them - Were convicted under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 IPC while was convicted under Sections 148 and 302/149 IPC - He was acquitted of charge under Sections 307/149 IPC - Held, Court are of opinion that evidence of said doctor would have proved to be an important connecting link and in absence thereof testimony of lacks credence particularly because there is a vital discrepancy between the two witnesses in matter of time at which they proceeded to Village Bilari - When presence of two witnesses in village itself is questioned prosecution ought to have examined - Trial court has also proceeded on footing that was murdered some time after occurrence and some of accused had been charge-sheeted therefor - There is no material on record in support of said version and trial court could not have taken same as granted - Trial Judge has allowed his imagination to run riot while discussing contention of defence with reference to contusions found on body of - Trial court has observed without any basis therefor on evidence during this process of hitting accused must have certainly tried to have a grip of so that he could not stand and run away again and in doing so he might have given him blows by his knee - Trial court has completely gone off track in thinking so - Appeals Dismissed
JUDGMENT
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
SRINIVASAN, J. - These appeals are directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeals Nos. 806-807 of 1988 reversing the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Moradabad in ST No. 608 of 1985 and acquitting all the accused who stood charged under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 IPC. Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 1990 is by the widow of one of the murdered persons while the other two appeals are by the State.
2. The case of the prosecution was as follows :
On 14-7-1985 Sohan Pal Singh, PW 1 and his son Avdesh Kumar PW 3 as well as one Inder Pal Singh were going on motorcycle of the first of them from Village Bilari to Village Chawra. At the same time Raj Kumar Singh and his son Dhirender Singh were proceeding on another motorcycle along with them. At about 8.30 p.m. when they reached Village Bonda Ferozepur they saw a tractor parked on the middle of the road with its lights on. It had no bonnet. The accused namely Mahender Singh, Om Vir, Som Vir, Om Pratap Singh, Onkar Singh and Raghu Raj Singh were standing near the tractor. One of them namely, Raghu Raj Singh had a hasiya while the others had country-made pistols. The motorcycle of Raj Kumar Singh was stopped on seeing the aforesaid persons on the road and the other motorcycle was stopped a few steps behind. The accused who had pistols fired at Raj Kumar Singh and Dhirender Singh. The former fell down on receiving gunshot injuries. Raghu Raj Singh assaulted him with hasiya and gave several blows. Dhirender Singh started running away but was chased by the accused. Another tractor came from behind which was stopped by PW 1. Dhirender Singh attempted to climb on the said tractor but the accused fired at him as a result of which he received gunshot injuries and fell down. Ram Swaroop, PW 2 and his son Nathu Singh who had come on the said tractor also got injuries when they tried to save Dhirender Singh. Some other persons who had come on the said tractor ran away. Both Raj Kumar Singh and Dhirender Singh died on the spot as a result of the injuries. In the meantime villagers came from the village and the accused boarded their tractor and tried to escape. The tractor got stuck in the ditch and the accused left it and ran away. The FIR was lodged by PW 1 at Police Station Kurh Fatehgarh at 10.00 p.m. on the same day.
3. The accused were not traceable for three or four days. Three of them surrendered on 17-7-1985 in the court at Moradabad and the remaining three persons surrendered on 18-7-1985. They pleaded not guilty and stated that they were falsely implicated on account of enmity. One of them namely, Om Vir Singh stated that at the time of the occurrence he was on duty in the cooperative bank at Moradabad and in support of his claim he examined the Branch Manager as DW 1. The prosecution examined ten witnesses. PWs 1 to 3 claimed to be eyewitnesses. The Additional Sessions Judge found all the accused to be guilty and convicted them. Mahender Singh, Om Vir Singh, Om Pratap Singh and Som Vir Singh were convicted under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 IPC while Raghu Raj Singh was convicted under Sections 148 and 302/149 IPC. He was acquitted of the charge under Sections 307/149 IPC. Death sentence was awarded to Mahender Singh and Raghu Raj Singh under Sections 302/149 IPC. All the accused were further sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 148 IPC. Mahender Singh, Om Vir Singh, Om Pratap and Som Vir Singh were further sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 307/149 IPC. All the sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.
4. Two appeals were preferred before the High Court. One was by Mahender Singh and Raghu Raj Singh and the other by the remaining accused. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused and allowed the appeal. The conviction and sentences were therefore set aside.
5. The widow
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.