Back
2011 (4) Supreme 346
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. B.S. Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar, JJ.
State of U.P. — Appellant
versus
Mohd Iqram & Anr. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1693-1694 of 2005
Decided on : 13-6-2011
AIR 1983 SC 684; AIR 2010 SC 2933 – Relied upon
(b) Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 – Section 313 – Court cannot place reliance on incriminating material against the accused, unless it is put to him during his examination under Section 313 Cr. P.C. (Para 12)
AIR 1984 SC 1622; AIR 1992 SC 2100; AIR 2011 SC 200 – Relied upon
(c) Criminal Trial – Burden of proof – Once the prosecution had brought home the evidence of the presence of the accused at the scene of the crime, then the onus shifts on the defence to explain as to what could have brought them to the spot at that dead of night. (Para 15)
(d) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 378 – Interference with judgment of acquittal – Trial court, on strong circumstantial evidence unmistakably pointing to the guilt of the accused convicting them – High Court erred in reversing the same. (Para 17)
(2010) 9 SCC 189; (2010) 13 SCC 657; AIR 2011 SC 280; (2011) 2 SCC 83; (2011) 3 SCC 317; (2011) 4 SCC 786; (2011) 2 SCC 750; (2011) 4 SCC 779 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
This is an appeal against acquittal by the High Court reversing the judgment of conviction by the trial court.
Finding of the Court:
High Court erred in reversing the judgment of the trial court.
Result : Appeals allowed.
Key Points: - Point 1 (!) - Point 2 (!) - Point 3 (!)
JUDGMENT
Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. —
1. These appeals have been preferred by the State of U.P. against the judgment and order dated 25.04.2003 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal Nos. 14 and 60 of 1981, reversing the judgment and order of the Sessions Court dated 20.12.1980 in Session Trial No. 382 of 1980 passed by the learned District Judge, Saharanpur, by which both the respondents stood convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter called as ‘IPC’) and had been awarded life imprisonment.
2. The brief resume of the facts as emerging from the FIR and the evidence adduced by the parties is set forth:
(A) One Rashmi, deceased, aged about 30 years had been married to Suresh Kumar (accused, acquitted by the Sessions Court), but her relations with him and her mother in law always remained strained. They had no child. Suresh Kumar obtained a decree of divorce on 30.01.1980 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and as per the decree, Rashmi, deceased, was permitted to reside in a room with an enclosed open area towards its West, apart from the rest of the house, and she was granted maintenance @ Rs.150/- per month till her life time or remarriage, whichever was earlier. Being aggrieved, Rashmi, deceased, had preferred an appeal against the said decree of divorce dated 30.01.1980 and the same was pending before the District Judge, Saharanpur.
(B) On 15.0.5.1980 at about 9.00 P.M., S.I. Brahm Pal Singh (PW.6) of Police Station Sadar Bazar accompanied by Head Constable Balvir Singh (PW.7) and other two constables was on a routine check-up and general patrolling. On reaching the West of Adarsh School in the close vicinity of the house of Rashmi, deceased, he and his companions heard shrieks emanating from the house of Suresh Kumar accused known as “Jagadhari Walon Ki Kothi”. The police party saw three persons scaling down the wall of the Sahan towards West of the room under the occupation of Rashmi, deceased.
(C) On being challenged and flashing of torch light, two of them ran towards North West and the third towards South. On a chase, the present two respondents who were running towards North West, were caught hold by Samay Singh (PW.8) and one Sharif who was present there. The other accused who ran towards South, managed to escape. He was named as Suresh Kumar by the present two respondents after they had been apprehended. The respondents led the police party inside the Sahan of the said house. The lock inside the door opening in the Sahan was broken by S.I. Brahm Pal Singh (PW.6) and a woman was seen lying unconscious on the floor in the room on a cot. In the meanwhile, Mahesh Kumar (PW.3), (brother of Suresh Kumar), also came down from the upper storey besides other persons. Mahesh Kumar (PW.3) took Rashmi, deceased, by car to S.B.D. Hospital, Saharanpur. The respondents had been taken to the police station Sadar Bazar where FIR was lodged by S.I. Brahm Pal Singh (PW.6). However, on receiving the information of death of Rashmi, deceased, at about 11.00 P.M. from Mahesh Kumar (PW.3), the case was converted under Section 302 IPC and investigation ensued.
(D) The post-mortem of the dead body was conducted by Dr. G.R. Sharma (PW.1) on 16.05.1980, according to which the deceased was about 30 years of age and had died about 18 hours from the time of conducting post-mortem. The doctor found the following ante-mortem injuries on her person:
(1) Lacerated wound 1 = cm x 1 = cm x < cm on left eyelid with contusion 7.5 x 2 cm extending from left eyelid to left temple region.
(2) Abrasion 4 x = cm on left cheek.
(3) Abrasion 1 = cm x > cm on left side neck, 2 cm below angle of mandible.
(4) Abrasion = cm x = cm with contusion 1 = cm x 1 cm on the right side of neck, 4 cm below angle of mandible.
(5) Abrasion 1 = cm x 1 cm on back of left shoulder joint top.
(6) Abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm on back of left elbow joint.
(7) Contusion 5 cm x 3 cm on right forearm upper
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
