Back
2009(6) Supreme 384
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.S. Sirpurkar and Deepak Verma, JJ.
Ramesh & Anr. — Appellants
versus
State of U.P. — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 184 of 2005
Decided on : 25-08-2009
Facts of the Case :
1. Accused persons six in number were prosecuted herein in the instant case for dragging deceased to a well and thereafter causing his death by firing shots at him .Trial Court convicted accused persons. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.
2. Present appeals have been filed against said order of High Court.
Findings of the Court :
High Court came to the conclusion that evidence of (PW-4) and (PW-5) were absolutely trustworthy and 1stood the acid test of cross-examination. High Court further held that there was enough support in corroborating evidence, inasmuch as in the FIR itself, names of all the accused persons alongwith the part played by each of them was reflected. was also held by the High Court that there was no possibility of ante-dating the FIR. The factum of this murder was mentioned in the other FIR, wherein it was complained that the complainants in this case had caused the murder of one of the persons of the accused party and since that FIR was already recorded by 7.45 p.m., there was no question of ante-dating the present FIR. The High Court also held that the medical evidence was enough to prove the guilt. On this basis, the conviction came to be confirmed. Courts in a most balanced manner, appreciated the evidence of two eyewitnesses who had given graphical description of the whole incident. Merely because (PW-4) was not from the same village, it could not be said that he had no business in the village. It had come in the evidence clearly that distance between village of (PW-4) and the village where the incident took place was hardly about 1.5 km. Therefore, his coming to the village for purchasing the seeds could not be viewed with a suspicion. Some minor contradictions in evidence of prosecution witnesses had been rightly disbelieved by the Trial Court and the High Court. Prosecution proved its case to the hilt. Trial Court and the High Court were right in convicting the appellants/accused. Appeals were dismissed.
Result : Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT
V.S. SIRPURKAR, J.—
1. This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 184 of 2005, Criminal Appeal No. 364 of 2005 and Criminal Appeal No. 548 of 2005. First mentioned Appeal has been filed by Ramesh, original accused No. 2 (A-2) and Ram Nath, original accused No. 5 (A-5), while the second mentioned Appeal has been filed by Mani Ram, original accused No. 3 (A-3). The last mentioned Appeal has been filed by Ram Kumar, original accused No. 1 (A-1). All of them were convicted for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 149, 147 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC” for short) by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Unnao. They were tried alongwith two other accused persons, namely, Swami Nath @ Swami Dayal, original accused No. 4 (A-4) and Ram Naresh, original accused No. 6 (A-6). Even these two accused persons A-4 and A-6 were also convicted along with the appellants herein, however, it is reported that Swami Nath @ Swami Dayal (A-4) has not filed any appeal, while Ram Naresh (A-6) is already dead. That leaves us with only the four accused persons.
2. All the six accused persons originally faced a charge under Section 302 IPC. Appellants Ram Kumar (A-1), Mani Ram (A-3) and Swami Dayal @ Swami Nath (A-4) were tried substantively for the offence under Section 302 IPC on the allegation that they had committed murder of one Raj Kumar (deceased) on 24.10.1978 at about 5 p.m. near a well located to the south-east of the house of Pancham in Village Karia Khera, Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao. They were also alternatively charged with other accused for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. Some accused persons were also tried under Section 148 IPC and two of them, namely, A-5 and A-6 were tried for the offence under Section 147 IPC.
3. The deceased Raj Kumar, who was about 24 years old, was the real brother of Prithvi Raj (PW-1), the complainant. They had two other brothers and five sisters. One of the sister is Daya Wati (PW-5), aged about 17 years at the time of the incident. Ram Kumar (A-1) and Ram Nath (A-5) are the real brothers, while Ramesh (A-2) is the son of their cousin. Excepting Mani Ram (A-3), all the accused persons were from a single family. There was some enmity between the family of the accused and the family of the deceased. There were number of murders. Ram Raj, who was one of the brothers of Prithvi Raj and Raj Kumar (deceased) was murdered on 12.6.1977. In that murder case, Prithvi Raj (PW-1) had named 7 assailants, out of whom one was Ram Naresh (A-6). In that case, deceased Raj Kumar was a witness. In the murder case of Ram Raj, the prosecution evidence was to begin from 6.11.1978, i.e., about 12 days after the incident, which took place on 24.10.1978. In short, there is a strong motive of enmity in between the accused party and the complainant party.
4. It so happened that on the fateful day, i.e., 24.10.1978, Raj Kumar (deceased) went to his tubewell, which is at about 100-125 paces from his house and after watering the field, he came back home at about 4.30 p.m., as there was no electric current available. He again started for his tubewell and his sister Daya Wati (PW-5) and his mother and wife of Prithvi Raj, i.e., his sister-in-law also followed him. When Prithvi Raj came out of his house, Prahlad (PW-4) met him. Prahlad had come to the village to purchase the seeds. Two other persons also met him there and they also started towards the tubewell. The moment, they reached near the Neem tree situated at a distance of 15 paces from the house of the deceased, all the accused accosted him, surrounded him and dragged him by pulling near the well upto a distance of 10-15 paces. Ram Naresh (A-6) then exhorted that Raj Kumar (deceased) should be murdered in the same manner in which his brother Ram Raj was murdered, so that Raj Kumar may not appear as a witness. Thereupon, Mani Ram (A-3) fired a shot from his country made pistol, which was fol
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
