Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(SC) 706

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From the High Court of M.P at Gwalior)
L. Nageswara Rao, B. V. Nagarathna, JJ.
Viram @ Virma - Appellant
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2019 With Criminal Appeal No.32 of 2019
Decided On : 23-11-2021

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Christi Jain, Advocate
For the Respondent(s):Pashupathi Nath Razdan, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Though there are certain inconsistencies between oral testimony of witnesses and medical evidence, Appellants cannot seek reversal of judgments of Courts below in view of overwhelming oral evidence on record.
(2) Apex Court does not normally re-appreciate evidence unless assessment of High Court is vitiated by an error of law or procedure or is based on error of record, misreading of evidence or is inconsistent with evidence – Apex Court does not enter into credibility of evidence with a view to substitute its own opinion for that of High Court.

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302/149, 325/149, 324/149 and 323/149 – Murder and hurt – Common object of unlawful assembly – Though there are certain inconsistencies between oral testimony of witnesses and medical evidence, Appellants cannot seek reversal of judgments of Courts below in view of overwhelming oral evidence on record – Apex Court does not normally re-appreciate evidence unless assessment of High Court is vitiated by an error of law or procedure or is based on error of record, misreading of evidence or is inconsistent with evidence – Apex Court does not enter into credibility of evidence with a view to substitute its own opinion for that of High Court – Having scrutinised record of courts below, there is no error committed by them – Death of deceased was caused due to attack by Appellants – Other witnesses corroborated statement of injured witness and also spoke about injuries caused to them by Appellants – There is a contradiction between oral testimony of witnesses and medical evidence – Oral evidence discloses that there was indiscriminate attack by accused on deceased and other injured eye-witnesses – Appellants are liable to be convicted under Section 326 read with 149 IPC – Conviction of the Appellants under Sections 325/149, 324/149, 323/149 confirmed – Appellants have undergone a sentence of four and half years – Sentence of seven years under Section 326/149 would meet ends of justice – While upholding judgment of High Court regarding conviction and sentence of Appellants under Sections 325/149, 324/149, 323/149 and sentence imposed for such offences, conviction under Sections 302/149 converted to Section 326/149 and sentence altered from life imprisonment to seven years. (Paras 6, 7, 9, 11 and 12)
Facts of the case:
Accused were sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 149 IPC, 3 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 325/149, 2 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 324/149 and six months for each count under Section 323/149 IPC. High Court dismissed the appeals filed by Appellants by holding that there was no error committed by Trial Court. The discrepancies in the statements made by witnesses in Court were held to be minor in nature on the basis of which the Appellants cannot be said to be not guilty.
Findings of Court:
Fatal injury was caused by a hard and blunt weapon on the left parietal bone. There is no corresponding injury to the weapons used by Ramesh (A-9), Daulal @ Daulatram (A-12), Mool Chand (A-19) and Shriram (A-20). Therefore, the conviction of the Appellants under Section 302/149 is not justified. However, there is abundant evidence on record to show that the Appellants attacked deceased and the injured witnesses with deadly weapons.
Result : Appeals Partly allowed.

JUDGMENT :

L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.

1. These Criminal Appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior by which the conviction of the Appellants under Sections 147, 302/149, 325/149, 324/149, 323/149 and their sentences were upheld. On the oral report given by Solal son of Girdhari (PW-10), FIR No.48 of 1995 was registered at Police Station Kumbhraj, Guna, Madhya Pradesh. The informant Solal son of Girdhari stated that Babulal Lodha son of Prabhulal Lodha and Shankarlal (PW-11) had an altercation with Shriram and others during the day time on 19.08.1995. After sunset, Shriram Sarpanch, Biram, Devlal, Gyarasiram, Shrilal, Gangaram, Kamarlal, Ramesh, Nathulal, Laxminarayan, Sholal son of Gopal Lodhi, Kanhaiyalal, Moolchand, Navneet Ram, Daula, Bhima, Hiralal, Dhurya, Bansilal, Hazari, Parmanand, Bala Bux son of Balram, Ram Narayan Lodha armed with farsa, lathi, ballam, spear and sword attacked Shankarlal (PW-11) and Babulal Lodha. The informant along with Rodibai (PW-1), Shantibai (PW-2), Pana Bai (PW-4), Babulal S/o Girdhari (PW-6), Bala Bux (PW-7), Panchulal (PW-8) and Kesharbai (PW-9) rushed to rescue Shankarlal (PW-11) and Babulal son of Prabhulal Lodha. Shriram, Devlal, Gyarasi, Shrilal, Kamarlal, Ramesh @ Barya, Nathulal, Sholal son of Gopal Lodhi, Kanhaiyalal, Daula @ Daulatram, Bhima, Hira Lal, Hazari, Parmanand, Bala Bux son of Balram, Ramnarayan, Laxmi Narayan and Viram @ Virma assaulted the informant and others who reached the place of incident with farsa, spear and sword and inflicted injuries on their heads, legs, back and other parts of the body. The Appellants were charged under Section 302 and 324 IPC, alternatively under Sections 147, 302/149, 324/149, 329/149 IPC. There were a total of 21 accused apart from the two juveniles Ram Narayan and Kanhaiya Lal. 14 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution.

2. On a consideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the Trial Court held the accused guilty of committing offences under Section 147, 302/149 for committing murder of Babulal and under Sections 325/149, 324/149, 323/149 for voluntarily causing hurt to Rodibai (PW-1), Shantibai (PW-2), Pana Bai (PW-4), Babulal S/o Girdhari (PW-6), Bala Bux (PW-7), Panchulal (PW-8) and Kesharbai (PW9), Solal son of Girdhari (PW-10) and Shankarlal (PW-11). The accused were sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 149 IPC, 3 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 325/149, 2 years rigorous imprisonment under section 324/149 and six months for each count under Section 323/149 IPC. The Trial Court noticed that except Shankarlal (PW-11), the other witnesses reached the place of occurrence after the accused assaulted Babulal son of Prabhulal and Shankarlal. However, the Trial Court found that the oral testimony of Shankarlal (PW-11) is creditworthy and there is sufficient corroboration from the ocular evidence of the other injured witnesses. The Trial Court observed that the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the injured eye-witnesses are trivial and their evidence cannot be rejected on that ground. According to the Trial Court, a cumulative reading of the oral testimony of the injured eyewitnesses conclusively proved that the accused inflicted a fatal injury on the head of the deceased Babulal. The injury certificates and the oral testimonies of Dr. A.D. Bhindurkar (PW-13) and Dr. Sitaram Singh (PW-15) was scrutinized by the Trial Court and the submission on behalf of the defence that there is a contradiction between the ocular testimony of the witnesses and the medical evidence was rejected.

3. The High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Appellants by holding that there was no error committed by the Trial Court. The discrepancies in the statements made by the witnesses in Court were held to be minor in nature on the basis of which the Appellants cannot be said to be not guilty. The attack made by all the accused on the deceased

Click Here to Read the rest of this document