2008 Supreme(SC) 1127

2008(5) Supreme 419
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam and Aftab Alam, JJ.
State of Haryana — Petitioner
versus
Shibu @ Shiv Narain and Ors. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 235-236 of 2001
Decided on : 25-07-08

Important Point
Where the investigation had not been fair and an interpolation had been made in some important document, a serious doubt is created with regard to integrity of investigation and veracity of prosecution’s story.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Prosecution of accused persons three in number for causing death of deceased by assaulting him with deadly weapons like swords and pharsas – Conviction by Trial Court – Appeal – Acquittal by High Court – Appeal against acquittal – Finding of High Court that presence of eye witnesses PW-5 and PW-6 at the spot was difficult to accept – Description of attack given by two witnesses also belied their presence as in the F.I.R, it had been clearly stated that two injuries had been caused to deceased i.e. one by B with a sword and other by S with a pharsa – Post mortem report however, mentioned only one injury that also by B – Several circumstances existed which belied prosecution case and showed that investigation had not been fair – In column, 10 of inquest report a serious interpolation had been made to fit in with new story – Presence of injury on ankle allegedly caused by S was first noted and then by interpolating word “nahi”, effort had been made to show that there was no second injury on deceased – This interpolation was further evident from fact that an injury which was present would alone find mention in document and not a negative fact that there was no injury – Where the investigation had not been fair and an interpolation had been made in some important document, a serious doubt could be created with regard to integrity of investigation and veracity of prosecution’s story- High Court had elaborately highlighted aforesaid aspects to conclude that prosecution version was highly improbable and lacked credence – Appeals dismissed. (Paras 7, 8, 10)

       1996 (1)Recent Criminal Reports 367 – Relied upon.

       Appeal against acquittal – There is no embargo on appellate court reviewing evidence upon which an order of acquittal is based – In an appeal against acquittal, High Court as court of first appeal is obligated to go into greater detail of evidence to see whether any miscarriage has resulted from the order of acquittal, though it has to act with great cir-cumspection and utmost care before ordering the reversal of an acquittal – Generally, the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with because the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by acquittal – The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on evidence adduced in case, one pointing to guilt of accused and other to his innocence, view which is favourable to accused should be adopted – The paramount consideration of court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented – A miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the guilty is no less than from conviction of an innocent – In a case where admissible evidence is ignored, a duty is cast upon appellate court to reappreciate the evidence where the accused has been acquitted, for the purpose of ascertaining as to whether any of the accused really committed any offence or not.

       (2002(4 )SCC 85) – Relied upon.

       Appeal against acquittal – The principle to be followed by the appellate court considering appeal against judgment of acquittal is to interfere only when there are compelling and substantial reasons for doing so – If the impugned judgment is clearly unreasonable and relevant and convincing materials have been unjustifiably eliminated in the process, it is a compelling reason for interference.

       (2003(1) SCC 465), (2003(10) SCC 700), (2003 (11) SCC 271), (2003 (11) SCC 280) ,(2003 (11)SCC 527) – Relied upon.

       Facts of the Case :

       1.Accused persons three in number were prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of deceased by assaulting him with deadly weapons like swords and pharsas. Trial Court convicted accused persons for said offence On Appeal thereagainst High Court acquitted accused persons.

       2.Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

       Presence of eye witnesses PW-5 and PW-6 at the spot was difficult to accept. Description of attack given by two witnesses also belied their presence as in the F.I.R, it had been clearly stated that two injuries had been caused to deceased i.e. one by B with a sword and other by S with a pharsa. Post mortem report however, mentioned only one injury that also by B . Several circumstances existed which belied prosecution case and showed that investigation had not been fair.In column, 10 of inquest report a serious interpolation had been made to fit in with new story. Presence of injury on ankle allegedly caused by S was first noted and then by interpolating word “nahi”, effort had been made to show that there was no second injury on deceased. This interpolation was further evident from fact that an injury which was present would alone find mention in document and not a negative fact that there was no injury .Where the investigation had not been fair and an interpolation had been made in some important document, a serious doubt could be created with regard to integrity of investigation and veracity of prosecution’s story. High Court had elaborately highlighted aforesaid aspects to conclude that prosecution version was highly improbable and lacked credence.

       Result : Appeals dismissed.