IMPORTANT POINT
Unless there is cogent and specific evidence attributing a specific role in the incident to the accused persons, who have themselves been injured and there being no explanation forthcoming as to such injuries, it would be unsafe to pass an order recording conviction and sentence against the appellants, moreso when the prosecution has produced, in support of its case, witnesses who are inimical to the accused persons.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code,1860-Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 325/149, 326/149, 324/149, 504/149, 506/149, 337/149, 338/149, 341/149, 307/149 and 302/149 - Arms Act- Section 4 read with Section 25 –Prosecution of accused persons 36 in number for committing offences including of being members of an unlawful assembly, for causing grievous hurt in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly and also for committing murder-Trial Court convicted 35 accused persons and the remaining one accused person was acquitted-On appeals thereagainst High Court acquitted 21 out of the 35 convicted accused persons while upholding the order of conviction and sentence of the remaining 14 accused persons-Appeals- Nine persons including four witnesses belonging to the complainant party received injuries whereas as many as 14 accused persons received injuries including some who even suffered grievous injuries-Admittedly, there was a mob of about 75-100 persons who descended from the hill side to the place of occurrence by pelting stones and a melee followed- Not even a single witness including the injured witnesses could specifically state as to who had caused what injury either to deceased or to the injured witnesses or to the accused- A very general statement had been made that accused persons were armed with deadly weapons and caused injuries to complainant party- In view of such omnibus and vague statements given by witnesses, Court below acquitted as many as 21 accused persons on the ground that there was no evidence on record to implicate them in the offences alleged- There being no other evidence to specifically ascribe any definite role to any of 14 appellants , difficult to hold that any of appellant had inflicted any particular injury on any of the deceased or the injured witnesses- Not only the members of the complainant party received injuries, members of accused party were also injured during course of incident and some of accused persons even sustained grievous injuries- On appreciation of entire evidence on record, findings recorded by High Court as also by trial Court held unsustainable- Appellants were acquitted giving them benefit of doubt-Appeals allowed. (Paras 19 to 24)
       Criminal Trial-Group rivalries-It is an accepted proposition that in the case of group rivalries and enmities, there is a general tendency to rope in as many persons as possible as having participated in the assault- In such situations, the Courts are called upon to be very cautious and sift the evidence with care- Where after a close scrutiny of the evidence, a reasonable doubt arises in the mind of the Court with regard to the participation of any of those who have been roped in, the Court would be obliged to give the benefit of doubt to them. (Para 21)
       Facts of the Case :
       Accused persons 36 in number were prosecuted herein in the instant case for committing offences including of being members of an unlawful assembly, for causing grievous hurt in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly and also for committing murder.Trial Court convicted 35 accused persons and the remaining one accused person was acquitted.On Appeals thereagainst High Court acquitted 21 out of the 35 convicted accused persons while upholding the order of conviction and sentence of the remaining 14 accused persons.
       2.Present appeals have been filed against said order of High Court.
       Findings of the Court :
       Evidence on record showed that Nine persons including four witnesses belonging to the complainant party received injuries whereas as many as 14 accused persons received injuries including some who even suffered grievous injuries. Admittedly, there was a mob of about 75-100 persons who descended from the hill side to the place of occurrence by pelting stones and a melee followed. Not even a single witness including the injured witnesses could specifically state as to who had caused what injury either to deceased or to the injured witnesses or to the accused. A very general statement had been made that accused persons ere armed with deadly weapons and caused injuries to complainant party. In view of such omnibus and vague statements given by witnesses, Court below acquitted as many as 21 accused persons on the ground that there was no evidence on record to implicate them in the offences alleged. There being no other evidence to specifically ascribe any definite role to any of 14 appellants , difficult to hold that any of appellant had inflicted any particular injury on any of the deceased or the injured witnesses. Not only the members of the complainant party received injuries, members of accused party were also injured during course of incident and some of accused persons even sustained grievous injuries. On appreciation of entire evidence on record, findings recorded by High Court as also by trial Court were held unsustainable. Appellants were acquitted giving them benefit of doubt. Appeals allowed.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. —

1.By this judgment and order, we propose to dispose of the two appeals filed by the fourteen accused persons who have been convicted and sentenced by the 2nd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar by judgment and order dated 10.09.2004 which has been upheld by the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench.

2.Originally, there were altogether 38 accused persons, out of which two were juveniles. Consequently, the trial Court of the 2nd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar tried 36 accused persons and by judgment and order dated 10.09.2004 convicted 35 accused persons of the offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code [for short ‘IPC’] including the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and the remaining one accused person was acquitted.

3.Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, all the 35 accused persons filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 617 of 2004 before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. By its judgment and order dated 14.03.2006, the High Court acquitted 21 out of the 35 convicted accused persons while upholding the order of conviction and sentence of the remaining 14 accused persons.

4.Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of conviction and sentence passed by the High Court, two appeals have been filed by the 14 convicted persons which we have heard together.

5.The counsel appearing for the parties have taken us through the judgments of the Courts below against which the present appeals are filed as also through the evidence on record.

6.Before we proceed to discuss the issues that arise for our consideration, it would be relevant and appropriate to recapitulate the facts out of which the present appeals arise.

7.Accused numbers 1 to 36 were charge-sheeted and sent for trial for committing offences including of being members of an unlawful assembly, for causing grievous hurt in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly and also for committing murder. The said 36 accused persons were charge-sheeted under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 325/149, 326/149, 324/149, 504/149, 506/149, 337/149, 338/149, 341/149, 307/149 and 302/149 of the IPC. In addition to the aforesaid offences, the accused persons were sent for trial for possession of weapons in contravention of the provisions of the Arms Act and thereby committing offence under Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act.

8.A criminal case [FIR Crime No. 138/2003 - Exh.138] was registered on 12.09.2003 on the basis of the complaint of one Bajirao Bhaguji Zavare [PW2]. The said complaint was recorded by Mohan Bankar [PW-12], P.S.I. attached to the Police Station, Parner who has stated that prior to the recording of the aforesaid complaint of PW-2, information was received on telephone by the Parner Police Station from the Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar regarding the admission of injured and the deceased in the hospital of Dr. Deshpande. On receipt of the said information, PW-12 immediately rushed to the said hospital. On reaching the hospital, he had drawn the inquest panchnama of the two dead bodies of deceased Balasaheb Rambhau Salunke and Vilas Rambhau Salunke, who had died in the meantime. In the said hospital, he also recorded the complaint of PW- 2 and thereafter he returned to the Police Station whereafter the aforesaid FIR was registered.

9.It is also alleged that both the accused party as well as the complainant party were in dispute, although, they are residents of different villages. It has also come on record that some of the accused persons and the complainant are relatives. There is a temple of Khandoba situated at village Kamatwadi and the same was initially managed by Khandoba Deo Panch Committee constituted of the respectable villagers. Subsequently, Shri Khanderao Deosthan Trust was given the responsibility of managing the said temple. It is also alleged that Shri Khanderao Deosth

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2010 Supreme(SC) 438

2010 (3) Supreme 726SUPREME COURT OF INDIAV.S. Sirpurkar and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.Eknath Ganpat Aher & Ors. — AppellantsversusState of Maharashtra & Ors. — RespondentsCriminal Appeal No. 173 of 2007Decided on : 7-5-2010

2010 (3) Supreme 726
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.S. Sirpurkar and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
Eknath Ganpat Aher & Ors. — Appellants
versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 173 of 2007
Decided on : 7-5-2010