SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(SC) 357

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Aftab Alam & Ranjana Prakash Desai, JJ.
Rajendra Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttaranchal - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1702 OF 2008
Decided On : April 11, 2013.

IMPORTANT POINT
In Indian system of law, maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not followed.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code,1860-Section 302-Prosecution of appellant for causing death of deceased by inflicting injuries on him by a pair of scissors-Acquittal by Trial Court-State Appeal against acquittal-Allowed by High Court reversing order of acquittal passed by Trial Court-Appeal- No reason for trial court to come to conclusion that PW.2 and PW.3 were speaking falsely and were trying to hide the relationship between PW.2 and deceased or that he lived in the house of deceased as a tenant- In the first place no such inference was possible on the basis of depositions of PW.2 and PW.3 and and more importantly even if it was assumed for the sake of argument that depositions of PW.2 and PW.3 were incorrect in regard to the relationship between PW.2 and deceased and in regard to PW.2 living in the house of deceased as a tenant at the time of occurrence, held incomprehensible as to how that could be the ground to reject their deposition entirely even though it was perfectly sound in respect of the main prosecution case- In Indian system of law, maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not followed- Testimonies of PW.2 and PW.3 wholly reliable - No reason not to accept the same-Apart from that scissors used for killing the deceased was recovered from shop of appellant- High Court rightly rejected view taken by trial court as wholly untenable and rightly accepted the evidences of PW.2 and PW.3 in order to bring home the guilt of appellant-Appeal dismissed (Paras 27 to 37)

       Facts of The Case :

        Appellant was prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of deceased by inflicting injuries on him by a pair of scissors. Trial Court acquitted appellant on the ground that prosecution was not able to establish the charge against the appellant .State Appeal against acquittal was allowed by High Court reversing order of acquittal passed by Trial Court.

        B. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

        There was no reason for trial court to come to conclusion that PW.2 and PW.3 were speaking falsely and were trying to hide the relationship between PW.2 and deceased or that he lived in the house of deceased as a tenant. In the first place no such inference was possible on the basis of depositions of PW.2 and PW.3 and more importantly even if it was assumed for the sake of argument that depositions of PW.2 and PW.3 were incorrect in regard to the relationship between PW.2 and deceased and in regard to PW.2 living in the house of deceased as a tenant at the time of occurrence, held incomprehensible as to how that could be the ground to reject their deposition entirely even though it was perfectly sound in respect of the main prosecution case. In Indian system of law, maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not followed. Testimonies of PW.2 and PW.3 held to be wholly reliable . No reason not to accept the same. Apart from that scissors used for killing the deceased was recovered from shop of appellant. High Court rightly rejected view taken by trial court as wholly untenable and rightly accepted the evidences of PW.2 and PW.3 in order to bring home the guilt of appellant. Appeal was dismissed.

       Result : Appeal dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

Aftab Alam, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated April 30, 2008 passed by the Uttarakhand High Court in Government Appeal No.1174 of 2001 (Old No.303 of 1991). By the impugned judgment, the High Court allowed the Government Appeal, set aside the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial court, and finding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder convicted him under section 302 of the Penal Code and gave him the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life.

2. The case of the prosecution is based on a written report dated July 26, 1988 submitted at Police Station Dehradun by one Vijay Singh s/o Puran Singh Rana (hereinafter referred to as “the informant”). In the written report it was stated that the informant’s elder brother, namely, Kishan Singh Rana (the deceased) was a peon in the Bank of India, Rajpur Road Branch, Dehradun. He had given a pair of pants and some cloth for stitching to Rajendra Singh tailor (the appellant), whose shop is on the road just near their house. The appellant did not return the stitched clothes even after several days and on the evening prior to the date of occurrence, there was a quarrel between the informant’s brother and the appellant on that issue. On July 26, 1988 (the date of occurrence) the informant’s brother had gone to the bank as usual on his motor cycle. He returned from the bank at about 1.00 p.m. and as he reached in front of the appellant’s shop, he got down from the motor cycle as the road was broken at that point. At that instant, the appellant came out of his shop carrying a pair of scissors in his hands; hurling abuses, he came down to the road and attacked the informant’s brother with the scissors with the intent to kill him. In order to save his life, Kishan Singh Rana ran down the road but the appellant chased him and caught him after some distance in front of Chintamani’s house. At that spot he gave the informant’s brother many blows by the scissors, one after the other. Kishan Singh Rana fell down bleeding on the road. It was further stated in the written report that besides the informant, Makhan Singh (PW.2), Laxman (Motor) Auto Mechanic (not examined) and his sister-in-law, Deepa (the wife of the deceased – PW.3) and many other persons and women of the area witnessed the occurrence. After assaulting the deceased, the appellant fled away from there. It was further stated in the written report that Makhan Singh took the informant’s brother to Dun Hospital, where he was declared brought dead. The written report concluded with the request to take legal action against the appellant.

3. The written report submitted by Vijay Singh was incorporated in the first information report (report No.230) giving rise to criminal case No.483/88/-under section 302 IPC, P.S. Dehradun.

4. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet and the appellant was put on trial on the charge under section 302 of the Penal Code.

5. In support of the charge, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses. PW.1, PW.2 and PW.3 are the eye witnesses of the occurrence, of whom PW.1 is also the first informant. PW.4 is one of the witnesses of the recovery of blood stained and plain earth and a chappal from the place of occurrence. He also identified his signature on the site plan (Ex.Ka-3) of the place of occurrence. PW.5 is another witness of the recovery of blood stained and plain earth, two chappals and one sandle from the place of occurrence. He identified his signature on the seizure memo (Ex.La-3). PW.6 and PW.7 are witnesses of the recovery of the scissors from the appellant’s shop. PW.8 is the doctor who had conducted post-mortem on the body of the deceased. PW.9 is a formal witness, the scribe of the chik FIR. PW.10 is a Sub-Inspector of Police who had examined the place of occurrence and had seized the articles from there. PW.11 is the Investigating Officer of the case.

6. The trial court found that there were a number of discrepancies in the depositions of the




















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top