2004(4) Crimes 202 (SC)
Supreme Court of India
(From Karnataka High Court)
Arijit Pasayat & C.K. Thakker, JJ.
Shashidhar Purandhar Hegde and Anr. —Appellants
versus
State of Karnataka —Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 748 of 1999
Decided on 15-10-2004
(ii) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 —Section 162, Explanation—Contradiction—Means setting of one statement against another and not the setting up of a statement against nothing at all.
Held : The word ‘contradiction’ is of a wide connotation which takes within its ambit all material omissions and under the circumstances of a case a court can decide whether there is one such omission as to amount to contradiction. [(See State of Maharashtra v. Bharat Chaganlal Raghani and Ors. (2001 (9) SCC 1), Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar (JT (2003) Supp (2) 354)]. The Explanation to Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the ‘Code’) is relevant. ‘Contradiction’ means the setting of one statement against another and not the setting up of a statement against nothing at all. As noted in Tahsildar Singh v. State of U.P. (AIR 1959 SC 1012) all omissions are not contradictions. As the Explanation to Section 162 of the Code shows, an omission to state a fact or circumstance in the statement referred to in sub-section (1) may amount to contradiction if the same appears to be significant or otherwise relevant having regard to the context in which the omission occurs. The provision itself makes it clear that whether any omission amounts to contradiction in the particular context is a question of fact. (Paras 12)
Result : Appeal dismissed.
Judgment
Arijit Pasayat, J.—The appellants faced trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 363, 368, 506 and 507 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’). The trial Court directed acquittal of the present appellants being of the view that the accusations have not been established. In appeal by the State, by the impugned judgment the High Court held that the appellants were guilty of offences punishable under Section 363 read with Section 34 IPC and were also liable to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. Appellant No.1 additionally was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three months on each count for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 507 IPC. It was directed that in case the fine is paid, a sum of Rs. 1,000/- was to be paid to Niranjan (PW-3) the victim. The appellants are described as A-1 and A-2 hereinafter.
2. The background facts and the findings of the trial Court are as follows:
Niranjan (PW-3) is the son of Sudhakar Kamat (PW-1) and was studying in St. Anthony’s school. PW-3 was a minor then. On 16.2.1989 at about 4.00 p.m. when Niranjan (PW-3) was in his class, his friend Sachin informed him that somebody wants to see him. Accordingly, PW-3 went out of his class room and saw A-1 standing near a motor-bike. He told PW-3 that Dr. Prabhu who is PW-3’s brother-in-law had asked him to take PW-3 whereupon PW-3 told him that he could not go out without the permission of his teacher. A-1 told him that he had already taken permission from his class teacher. Thereafter, he was taken in his motor-bike as a pillion rider. When they reached the 5th Main Road, A-2 was there. All the three of them went by motor-bike. Though PW-3 requested them that he would keep his school bag in his house, A-1 did not agree and he was taken away. Thereafter, they went into a forest for about 2 furlongs where A-1 collected his phone number. When PW-3 enquired about his brother-in-law-Dr. Prabhu, A-1 told him that he would find out about his brother-in-law. At about 6.30 p.m. A-1 came back and discussed something privately with A-2. Then A-2 told him that he had lost his ring and so saying he went to search for the lost ring. However, PW-3 became suspicious and asked A-1 to take him to his house. But A-1 assured him that after A-2 returned, they would go. When PW-3 insisted he threatened him saying that there was a ghost in that placed which made him to cry. At that time A-1 threatened him by showing a knife saying that he would stab him.
3. After some time one Nagapathy brought A-2 holding him. A-1 dragged PW-3 inside the forest and hid him covering his mouth with his hands. PW-3 had made some sound with his legs as he heard the voice of Narasimha Barakura (PW-5) who is his brother’s friend. Then they flashed a torch light and saw that PW-3 was being held by A-1. Immediately they apprehended A-1. Thereafter, all the persons came to the house of PW-1 and subsequently they produced him before police. (So the evidence of PW-3 gives a clear picture as to how these accused persons kidnapped him and held in the forest.) In the meantime, PW-1 had been informed over the phone by A-1 that he had kidnapped his child and he would be killed if he failed to pay Rs. 3 lakhs. The fact that A-1 had telephoned at about 4.30 p.m. is spoken to by Rajendra (PW-7) who is a rice mill owner and also P.V. Hegde (PW-11) who is working as a manager in the shop. According to PW-11 at 6.00 p.m. A-1 telephoned to some one. It is no doubt true both PWs. 7 and 11 could not know what he had spoken or to whom he had telephoned. But the fact remains that he had telephoned and those calls were received by PW-1 who is none other than the father of PW-3. He had clearly stated that the person who had spoken over the telephone had demanded a lump sum of Rs.3 lakhs for returning his child, lest he would be killed. PW-1 was also informed that he had to keep the money in a place where kumkum and lemon were placed and he had
Bhagwan Singh and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra
Ramesh Babulal Doshi v. State of Gujarat
Jaswant Singh v. State of Haryana
Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar and Ors.
State of Punjab v. Karnail Singh
State of Punjab v. Phola Singh and Anr.
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.