SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.
Rishiraj @ Tutul Mukharjee & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1301 of 2019
Hani @ Koustubh Samdariya - Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1302 of 2019
And
Vijay @ Hallo Jaiswal & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.1303 of 2019
Decided On : 20-05-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 148, 148, 149, 302 read with Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959 – Murder and rioting – Common object – Conviction and sentence – Prosecution case corroborated by medical evidence – Presence of appellants stands established all through, which was referred to in First Information Report and in evidence of all concerned eye-witnesses – Presence of witnesses was established – Evidence unfolded through eye-witness account about exhortation by appellants was consistent and cogent – Participation of appellants was not just as bystanders or only in oral altercation or scuffle – Their participation was full and effective – What is material is exhortation attributed to appellants who were shouting that deceased was alive and that he be killed – There was not even a suggestion that after first shot was fired, any of appellants backtracked or wanted to dissociate himself from what was unfolding – As such, appellants cannot escape vicarious liability – They were rightly convicted under Section 302 read with 149 of IPC – Appeals dismissed. (Paras 15, 16 and 17)
Facts of the case:
Present proceedings arise out of the registration of crime pursuant to First Information Report No.187 of 2010 dated 09.06.2010, lodged in respect of offences punishable under Sections 148, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. Appellants are challenging common judgment and order dated 10.08.2018 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal.
Findings of Court:
Presence of the appellants stands established all through, which was referred to in the First Information Report and in the evidence of all concerned eye-witnesses.
Result : Criminal Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Uday Umesh Lalit, J.
1. These appeals by special leave, at the instance of accused, named; (1) Rishiraj @ Tutul Mukharjee, (2) Samrat @ Laltu Mukharjee, (3) Vijay @ Hallo Jaiswal, (4) Ajay @ Chhotu @ Jijji Jaiswal and (5) Hani @ Koustubh Samadriya, challenge the common judgment and order dated 10.08.2018 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal Nos.452, 492, 522 and 538 of 2012.
2. The present proceedings arise out of the registration of crime pursuant to First Information Report No.187 of 2010 dated 09.06.2010, lodged with Torwa Police Station, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 148, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”, for short) read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (“Arms Act”, for short). The Report made by one Jugal Kishore @ Gappu (subsequently examined as PW-12 in the trial) was to the following effect:
3. In the consequential investigation undertaken, following items were seized from the place of occurrence: -
5 Blank Cartridges of 7.65 MM Pistol, which bears the following KP 7.65 MM.
2 Mobile Phones of Nokia Company having SIM Cards.
1 White Maruti Suzuki Ritz bearing No. CG10H-7
1 Maroon Honda Activa bearing No. CG 10 EH 5326.”
4. The post-mortem on the body of deceased Gudda Sonkar was conducted by Dr. Chaturbhuj Mishra, (subsequen
Murder and rioting – Appellants cannot escape vicarious liability when their participation in crime was full and effective.
Conviction and sentence must be commensurate with degree of complicity of accused persons.
The court held that the evidence of the eyewitnesses was reliable and sufficient to support the convictions, and that the appellants had failed to provide a reasonable explanation for their actions. ....
The judgment established the importance of reliable witness testimony, the impact of vicarious liability under section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and the need for specific evidence to establish gu....
Eyewitness testimony is crucial in establishing guilt, and the absence of motive does not negate direct evidence in murder cases.
The evidence must establish a premeditated intent to commit murder and the existence of an unlawful assembly with the common object of committing murder to support a conviction for murder under Secti....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.