2010 Supreme(SC) 216

2010 (2) Supreme 492
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.S. Sirpurkar and Surinder Singh Nijjar, JJ.
Khilan & Anr. — Appellants
versus
State of Madhya Pradesh — Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1348 of 2007
Decided on : 9-03-2010

IMPORTANT POINT
Even though the powers of Apex Court under article 136 of the Constitution are very wide, but they are exercised only in exceptional cases where substantial and grave injustice has been done to the aggrieved party.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code,1860-Sections 302,34-Prosecution of eight accused persons for forming an unlawful assembly and for arming themselves with deadly weapons and assaulting deceased in furtherance of their common object to kill him, in which they succeeded-Trial Court while convicting A1 to A4, acquitted other accused persons-Appeal- High Court upon re-appreciation of entire evidence upheld conviction and sentence of appellants-Appeal thereagainst by A1 and A2- High Court held that merely because witnesses were closely related to deceased and there was enmity between families was no reason to discard the evidence which was consistent and was corroborated- The weapons had been recovered at the instance of appellant- High Court also concluded that deceased had died due to the cumulative effect of all the injuries which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature- High court had endorsed the approach of Trial Court- Upon a close examination of the evidence of PW2 High Court came to a conclusion that the presence and participation of A4 in the crime was doubtful- Although the evidence of PW2 and PW4 was consistent with regard to the role played and the weapons used by A1 to A3-. However it suffered from material discrepancies/inconsistencies in relation to the role played and the weapons used by A4- Consequently he was given benefit of doubt and was acquitted- Appreciation of evidence by courts below could not be said to have resulted in grave injustice to the accused/appellants- The findings recorded by trial court had been reaffirmed by High Court on an independent appreciation of the evidence- In the absence of any infirmity either in the appreciation of the evidence or apparent miscarriage of justice, held not appropriate for Apex Court to interfere with the judgments of the courts below- Both the courts had painstakingly examined the entire evidence led by parties-Cogent reasons had been given in support of the conclusions reached by both the courts- Appellants unable to establish any exceptional circumstances or any miscarriage of justice which would shock conscience of Apex Court-Since instant case neither raised any exceptional issue nor resulted in miscarriage of justice-Hence appeal held liable to be dismissed. (Paras 16, 17, 21, 22)

       Facts of the Case :

        Eight accused persons were prosecuted herein in the instant case for forming an unlawful assembly and for arming themselves with deadly weapons and assaulting deceased in furtherance of their common object to kill him, in which they succeeded. Trial Court while convicting A1 toA4, acquitted other accused persons. On Appeal, High Court upon re-appreciation of entire evidence upheld conviction and sentence of appellants.

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

       Findings of the Court :

        High Court held that merely because witnesses were closely related to deceased and there was enmity between families was no reason to discard the evidence which was consistent and was corroborated,. The weapons had been recovered at the instance of appellant. High Court also concluded that deceased had died due to the cumulative effect of all the injuries which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. High court had endorsed the approach of Trial Court. Upon a close examination of the evidence of PW2 High Court came to a conclusion that the presence and participation of A4 in the crime was doubtful. Although the evidence of PW2 and PW4 was consistent with regard to the role played and the weapons used byA1 toA3. However it suffered from material discrepancies/inconsistencies in relation to the role played and the weapons used by A4. Consequently he was given been benefit of doubt and was acquitted. Appreciation of evidence by courts below could not be said to have resulted in grave injustice to the accused/appellants. The findings recorded by trial court had been reaffirmed by High Court on an independent appreciation of the evidence.In the absence of any infirmity either in the appreciation of the evidence or apparent miscarriage of justice, held not appropriate for Apex Court to interfere with the judgments of the courts below. Both the courts had painstakingly examined the entire evidence led by parties. Cogent reasons had been given in support of the conclusions reached by both the courts. Appellants were unable to establish any exceptional circumstances or any miscarriage of justice which would shock conscience of Apex Court. Since instant case neither raised any exceptional issue nor resulted in miscarriage of justice. Hence appeal was held liable to be dismissed.

       Result : Appeal dismissed.