Back
2009 Supreme(SC) 29
2009(1) Supreme 186
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Arijit Pasayat and Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
State of H.P. — Appellant
versus
Ram Krishan — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 553 of 2002
Decided on : 12-01-2009
For the Appellant :Naresh K. Shrma (for J.S. Attri), Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Where High Court’s order was based on surmises and conjectures, it could not be sustained..
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 452, 427 and 323 – Prosecution of respondent along with two others for causing death of deceased by hitting him on left side of his head – Prosecution case that after stone hit deceased he dropped dead at site and rolled down hill side upto a distance of about 50 feet – Trial Court while acquitting other co-accused persons convicted respondent u/s 302 IPC – Appeals thereagainst – High court while affirming acquittal of co-accused persons directed acquittal of respondent – Appeal against acquittal – No dispute that deceased died out of a head injury – Deposition of all eyewitnesses that accused hit deceased on left side of head with stone and he rolled down – Hence no material before High Court to come to a conclusion that death occurred due to fall – High Court came to a peculiar finding that it might be possible that before stone had hit head of deceased, he had slipped and had rolled down – However there was no material on record in this regard – High Court’s conclusion was that no one examined body of deceased before it rolled down to ascertain whether he was alive or dead – All the eyewitnesses had stated about assault of head of deceased by accused with the stone – Atleast five of injuries were on head, which could be related to assault by stone and more particularly injury No. 9 viz. the fracture in left temporal region – Since the High Court’s order was based on surmises and conjectures it could not be sustained – Impugned Order of High Court set aside and that of trial court restored – Appeal allowed. (Paras 5 to 7)
Facts of the case :
1.Respondent herein in the instant case was convicted for causing death of deceased by hitting him with a stone. On appeal, High Court acquitted respondent.
2.Present appeal has been filed against impugned order of acquittal passed by High Court.
Findings of the Court :
There was no dispute that deceased died out of a head injury. As per deposition of all eyewitnesses accused had hit deceased on left side of head with stone and he rolled down. Hence there was no material before High Court to come to a conclusion that death occurred due to fall. High court came to a peculiar finding that it might be possible that before stone had hit head of deceased, he had slipped and had rolled down. High Court’s order being based on surmises and conjectures could not be sustained.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —
1.Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court directing acquittal of the respondent. The Division Bench had disposed of two appeals, one by the accused and the other by the State, both questioning correctness of the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi. As noted above, while the accused questioned his conviction for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, the State’s appeal was against the acquittal in respect of offences punishable under Sections 452, 427 and 323 IPC so far as Respondent Ram Krishan is concerned and also questioning acquittal of co-accused Harminder. The High Court by the impugned judgment affirmed the order of acquittal as done by the trial court while also directing acquittal of the respondent.
2.Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
Laxmi Dutt (PW -1), resident of village Mandap in Tehsil Karsog was running a tailoring shop at the material time in village Maghundi at a distance of about one kilometer from his residential house; Manohar Lal (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’) was his younger brother and was running a shop of general merchandise at Maghandi in the business premises of PW -1 in the morning and evening, while during the day time he used to teach students of a nearby school. On 26.11.1998 at about 7.30 p.m. when the deceased was present in his aforesaid business premises, Ram Kishan (hereinafter referred to as the ‘accused’) and Harmender Singh (hereafter referred to as ‘the co-accused’) came there while under the influence of liquor. They wanted to take more liquor at the said business premises of the deceased. They asked the deceased to give them some eatables. The deceased, however, asked the accused persons not to take liquor in his business premises which inf1Jriated them and as a result they quarrelled with the deceased and slapped him. The accused persons also threw the goods at the business premises of the deceased helter-skelter. When the deceased asked them not to indulge in such mischief, they asked him to get lost. Thereupon the deceased went to the houses of Pawan Kumar (PW -5) and Dogar Ram residents of village Thaltu. The deceased informed them about the acts and conduct of the accused persons and then returned to his business premises along with PW5 and Dogar Ram, who is elder brother of accused Harmender Singh. PW -5 and Dogar Ram requested the accused persons not to commit the mischief in the business premises of the deceased. However, the accused persons asked them to get lost. The deceased then went to his house and informed Laxmi Dutt (PW-1) and Karam Dass (PW 6) and other persons present in the house about the acts and conduct of the accused persons. Laxmi Dutt (PW -1), Amba Dutt (PW2), Nanak Chand (PW3) and Preen La1 came along with the deceased and reached the business premises at about 8.15 p.m. They inquired from the accused persons as to why they had picked up a quarrel with the deceased? On such enquiry, the accused persons stepped out of the business premises of Manohar Lal (deceased), and with a stone, hit on the left side of his head and as a consequence, the deceased dropped dead at the site where he had sustained injury with stone Ext. P-1 and rolled down the hill-side upto a distance of about 50 feet. The accused persons thereafter pelted stones on the other persons present there thereby causing simple hurt to PW6 and Dogar Ram. On hearing the noise from the spot, Man Singh (PW7) also came to the place of occurrence. He asked the accused persons not to pelt stones and took them to their houses. PW-1, PW-7 and Khuba Raid went to ‘the house of Krishna Devi (PW-4), Pardhan of the Gram Panchayat and informed her of the murder of Manohar Lal (deceased). She accompanied them to the place of occurrence and inspected the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter, PW-1, PW-4 and PW-7 went to Police Station, Karsog and lodged FIR. Ext. PW-1/A under S
