1. Multiple accused charged with murder and rioting under Sections 148, 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code following a lethal weapon attack. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2020 Supreme(SC) 582
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N.V. RAMANA, SURYA KANT, HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.
Karulal & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 316 of 2011
Decided On : 09-10-2020
Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :T. Mahipal, Advocate
For the Respondent(s):Arjun Garg, Advocate
For the Appellant(s) :T. Mahipal, Advocate
For the Respondent(s):Arjun Garg, Advocate
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Testimony of related witness, if found to be truthful, can be the basis of conviction.
(2) If witnesses are otherwise trustworthy, past enmity by itself will not discredit any testimony.
(3) History of bad blood gives clear motive for crime.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 148, 302 read with Section 149 – Murder – Common object – Conviction and sentence – High Court found consistency in testimony of eyewitnesses and noted that injuries attributed by eyewitnesses to accused, is corroborated by medical evidence – Being related to deceased does not necessarily mean that PWs will falsely implicate innocent persons – Testimony of related witness, if found to be truthful, can be the basis of conviction – PW3 and PW12 were immediately present at the spot and identified accused with various deadly weapons in their hands – If witnesses are otherwise trustworthy, past enmity by itself will not discredit any testimony – History of bad blood gives clear motive for crime – Some witness may not support prosecution story for their own reasons and in such situation, it is necessary for Court to determine whether other available evidence comprehensively proves charge – Prosecution version is cogent and supported by three eyewitnesses who have given a consistent account of incident – Their testimonies are corroborated by medical evidence – Hostile witnesses will not affect conviction of appellants – Conviction of appellants was rightly ordered and correctly upheld by High Court – Appeal dismissed. (Paras 15, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 and 25)
Facts of the case:
Appellants challenge judgment and order dated 23.6.2009 in Criminal Appeal No.1637 of 1999 whereby, Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench approved the conviction of the appellants under Sections 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the resultant sentence for such conviction ordered by Trial Court.
Findings of Court:
Prosecution version is cogent and supported by three eyewitnesses who have given a consistent account of the incident. Their testimonies are corroborated by the medical evidence. Trial Judge had elaborately discussed the evidence of both sides and came to a logical conclusion which inspires confidence.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
Act Referred
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Appellants contend false implication due to enmity and challenge the reliability of related eyewitnesses and the impact of hostile witnesses. (Para 16 )
3. The court found eyewitness testimonies consistent and corroborated by medical evidence, noting that related witnesses are not inherently untrustworthy and enmity can establish motive. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 )
4. Testimony of related witnesses is reliable if truthful and corroborated; past enmity may serve as a motive for crime rather than just false implication. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 )
5. Appeal dismissed and convictions under Sections 148 and 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code upheld. (Para 24 , 25 )
6. Can the testimony of a related witness be the basis for conviction?
Yes, provided the testimony is found to be truthful. There is no legal proposition that relatives are untruthful; a plea of partiality requires evidence that the witnesses had reason to shield the actual culprit and falsely implicate the accused. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 )
7. How does the court treat past enmity between the accused and the victim's family?
Enmity is viewed as a double-edged weapon. While it may provide a motive for false implication, it simultaneously constitutes a motive for the commission of the crime and does not discredit otherwise trustworthy testimony. (Para 21 , 22 )
8. Does the presence of hostile witnesses necessarily invalidate a prosecution case?
No. The prosecution does not fail solely because some witnesses turn hostile, provided the remaining evidence is cogent, consistent, and comprehensively proves the charge. (Para 23 )
JUDGMENT :
Hrishikesh Roy, J.
1. This Appeal has been preferred by 5 accused, namely, Karulal(A-5), Amra(A-6), Kachru(A-7), Suratram(A-8) and Bhagirath(A-9). They challenge the judgment and order dated 23.6.2009 in Criminal Appeal No.1637 of 1999 whereby, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench approved the conviction of the appellants under Section 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “the IPC”) and the resultant sentence for such conviction ordered by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur (hereinafter referred to as, “the learned Trial Court”).
2. The prosecution case is that at about 8-8.30 AM Madhavji the deceased, was present in his fields on 18.8.1993 and his son Bhawarlal (PW3) was grazing cattle nearby. Bhawarlal suddenly heard his father cry out and saw that Amra, Kachru, Karu, Surtaram, Lalu (who is now dead) and Bhagirath were attacking his father with axe, sword, farsa, lathi, etc. On hearing commotion, Shyambai (PW 13), daughter of the deceased, and Bhawarlal (PW9) son of Kaniram and Babulal (PW12), also reached the spot. On seeing them, the accused ran away. Bhawarlal then arranged a bullock cart and took his injured father towards Narayangarh. When they were crossing the houses of the accused, Badambai, Munnabai, Ramibai, Sitabai and Veniram s/o Kachru, blocked the cart and tried to prevent PW3 from lodging the report and they also threatened to kill. But as other persons gathered around, the cart could proceed towards Narayangarh. On the way Madhavji died. Bhawarlal and Babulal reached Narayangarh Police Station with the dead body and lodged report at about 11.55 AM, within four hours of the incident. The distance between the police station and the spot is about 8 Kilometres.
3. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against six accused under Sections 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. Four others namely, Badambai, Munnabai, Ramibai and Sitabai were charged under Section 506 IPC as they allegedly obstructed and threatened the Informant, when they were proceeding with the injured in the bullock cart.
4. On evaluating the evidence against the 4 ladies charged under Section 506 IPC, the Trial judge held that this charge of obstruction and threat to kill the Informant, has not been proved and accordingly ordered for their acquittal.
5. Then the evidence against the accused who were charged under Section 148, 302 read with Section 149 IPC was considered. To prove its case, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses of whom, PW 1 witnessed the arrest of the accused. Four others, i.e. Kishanlal(PW6), Prabhulal (PW7), Bhawarlal(PW9) s/o Kaniram and Nanuram(PW13) had turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. Dr. P.N. Shrivastav (PW2) had performed the autopsy on the body of the deceased and noted the following nine injuries on his person:
(1) Incise wound 4” x 2” x 1/2" on left side of head with some pointed object.
(2) Compound fracture on right tumor and swelling around it which was hard and appeared to have been afflicted by some blunt object.
(3) Compound fracture of right Radioulna bone caused by some blunt object.
(4) Compound fracture of left Tumor wound caused by a hard blunt object.
(5) Cut wound on upper left arm 2” x 1” x 1/2" left Brachial bone with cut with dried blood inflicted with some sharp object.
(6) Compound fracture of left “Alna” with dried blood caused with some hard blunt object.
(7) Cut wound measuring 2x2x1” on right ankle with dried blood with some hard and blunt object resulting in cut veins.
(8) Compound fracture or right Tibia and Fabula with some hard and blunt object.
(9) Cut wound 2 x 2-1/2” on left thigh with cut veins and cut Femoral Artery with dried blood caused with some hard and cutting object.
6. According to the Doctor, the death was result of the bleeding following the injuries inflicted by hard, blunt and sharp-edged weapons and shock. He further opined during cross examination as under:
“Death of Madhav
