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

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R. S. Sarkaria and R. S. Pathak, JJ.
Ram Ashrit Ram and others - Appellants
versus
State of Bihar - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 1975
Decided on 13-1-81

Headnote:Criminal trial-All material prosecution witnesses interested-Their testimony requires close and severe scrutiny-Their evidence intrinsically improbable and unreliable - Police investigation also delayed and biased in favour of complainant party -Many infirmities and contradictions also appearing in evidence of prosecution witnesses - Absence of corroboration to material extent in all material particulars-Under these circumstances extremely hazardous to convict accused. (Paras 11, 12, 14, 15 and 18)

       

JUDGMENT

Sarkaria, J. - This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment dated May 16, 1974, of the High Court of Patna. It arises out of these facts:

2. On April 22, 1977 at about 8 p.m., the informant, Suraj Nath Chaudhary (PW 12) was keeping watch on wheat lying in his threshing floor. About 15 to 20 persons, variously armed, arrived there. He identified l3 out those persons, who are the appellants herein, apart form one Munshi Ram (since dead).

3. On seeing these persons coming armed, PW 12 raised an alarm: "Thief! Thief"! However, Ram Ashrit appellant 1, Manki Ram, appellant 2, and Kapildeo Ahir appellant 13, surrounded PW 12: while their companions started collecting wheat that lay stocked there in a chadar and bags. While Munshi and Manki were holding PW 12, Ram Ashrit dealt a bhala blow on his head. Ram Ashrit snatched away the single-barrel gun (Ex. 1) from PW 12. The gun was already loaded and during the struggle, the gun got fired. Munshi and Manki gave lathi blows to P.W. 12. On hearing the alarm, his brother, Bishwa Nath Chaudhary cousin Sheonath Chaudhary and his co-villagers, Jagarnath Chaudhary and Bhagwan Chaudhary were attracted to the spot. The miscreants surrounded and assaulted them also. Bishwa Nath Chaudhary (P.W.10) received several lathi blows at the hands of Ram Bachan Ram, Janki Ram and Sheomuni Ram, appellants. At the same time, appellant Kapildeo Ahir hit Sheonath with a pharsa on the head, felling him to the ground. Sri Ram and Ram Prasad Ram, armed appellants, indiscriminately beat Sheonath to unconsciousness. Ram Dhari and Chit Bahal appellants gave lathi blows to Sri Bhagwan Chaudhary (P.W. 8) was assaulted with lathi by Rambans Ram and Ranjeet Ram, appellants. On hearing the hue and cry, fifteen villagers, including P.W. 9 who was armed with a lathi and a bhala arrived. On the arrival of these co-villagers the appellants and their companions took to their heels carrying away with them the bundles of wheat, weighing 4 to 5 maunds, as also the gun they had snatched from P.W. 12. Some of the miscreants fled towards the North, while others ran away to the Chamar Toli in village Khodhri. The villagers chased them to that village and during the chase, there was exchange of lathi and bhala blows between the appellants and their pursuers. Sheonath, injured, was removed in an unconscious condition to Police Station, Karahgar, 8 miles away at the police station P.W. 12 lodged the first information report (Ex. 2). After registering the case, Tribeni Singh (P.W. 14) commenced the investigation. The injured persons, namely, P.W. 10, P.W. 12 and Sheonath Chaudhary were examined by Dr. Ramakant Rai (P.W. 13). The doctor found one lacerated wound and three bruises on the person of Sri Bhagwan Chaudhary. Injury (i) was found to be grievous. Six injuries were found on the person of Sheonath Chaudhary. Injury (i) was an incised wound on the head. Injury (ii), was a lacerated wound located behind injury (i), Injury (iii) was an intensive bruise, 14 inches X1½ inches, elogated, across the chest and abdomen from the right mid point of the clavicle to the left of the tenth rib. There was ecchymosis of the left eye. Injury (vi) was punctured wound on the left hand, ½ inch X 1½ inch X1 ½ inch. In the opinion of the doctor, injuries (i) and (ii) were grievous and (iii), (v) and (vi) were simple; that injury (i) had been caused with a sharp-cutting weapon, such as pharsa, while injury (vi) had been caused with a sharp and pointed weapon. The rest of the injuries on Sheonath had been caused with hard and blunt substance. As a result of these injuries, Sheonath succumbed to his injuries on April 24, 1967. The postmortem examination of his dead body was performed by Dr. K.N.P. Singh, who found the same six injuries on him. In his opinion, (i), (ii) and (iii) were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature; and that the injuries (i) and (ii) could be caused with the edge of a bhala. Dr. Ramakant

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