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

2024 Supreme(Pat) 1194

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Shailendra Singh, JJ.
Karan Yadav Son of Prakash Yadav - Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.839 of 2019
Decided On : 30-04-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajive Ranjan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, APP

The prosecution bears the burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and significant inconsistencies in witness testimony can lead to the acquittal of the accused.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Arms Act, 1959 - Section 27(1) - Murder conviction appealed against due to inconsistencies in prosecution testimonies and motives presented. The trial court convicted the appellant for murder with life imprisonment and fines; however, the appeal finds prosecutorial evidence unreliable - The informant's statement contains contradictory accounts regarding the occurrence, which undermines credibility and raises doubts. (Paras 10, 11, 26)

(B) Burden of proof - The prosecution failed to prove that the appellant was present at the crime scene or establish a credible motive for the murder - The evidence presented was insufficient to convict the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 24, 35)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted of murdering the deceased by firearm; however, the conviction is contested based on issues with witness reliability and inconsistencies in statements made to authorities.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the testimonies of key witnesses were contradictory, lacking veracity, and leading to reasonable doubt suitable for the acquittal of the appellant.

Issues: The main issues were whether the evidence presented was reliable and whether the prosecution established the appellant's motive and presence at the scene.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, noting the significant inconsistencies in witness accounts and the failure to corroborate facts, leading to the judgment being overturned.

Result: The appeal is allowed, and the appellant is acquitted.

Table of Content
1. factual background and prosecution story (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 7)
2. court's analysis on witness credibility (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 22 , 23 , 24)
3. appellant's defense arguments and inconsistencies in witness testimony (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
4. acquittal based on benefit of doubt (Para 32)
5. failure to prove motive and delay in f.i.r. (Para 35 , 36)

JUDGMENT :

RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.Shashi Bala Verma, learned Additional P.P. for the State.

2. The present appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction dated 01.06.2019 and order of sentence dated 13.06.2019 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-III, Munger in Sessions Trial No. 222 of 2016 (State vs. Karan Yadav and Anr.) whereby and whereunder the learned trial court has convicted this appellant for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short ‘IPC’) and Section 27 (1) of the ARMS ACT for murder of the deceased Gulshan Yadav @ Sarwan Yadav by firearm and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- only. On failure to pay the fine, the appellant shall undergo an additional simple imprisonment for a period of two months. He has been further sentenced for five years for the offence under Section 27 (1) of the ARMS ACT and has been directed to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he will have to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. All the sentences are to run concurrently except imprisonment in default of payment of fine.

Prosecution Story

3. The prosecution story is contained in the fardbeyan of Jitendra Kumar aged about 16 years, son of Jairam Yadav of village Kunnath Mohanpur, P.S. - Gauradih in the District of Bhagalpur. The English translation of the fardbeyan of the informant, who is brother of the deceased are as under:-

“My name is Jitendra Kumar, age about 16 years, s/o- Jairam Yadav, R/o – Kunnath Mohanpur, P.S.- Goradih, Dist.- Bhagalpur. Today, on 12/07/15 at 14:00 hrs, in the premises of Jawahar Lal Nehru Medical College and Hospital, I am giving my statement before the officer of O.P. Barari P.S., in the presence of my father Jairam Yadav S/o-Late Gena Yadav that my brother Gulshan Yadav @ Shrawan Yadav, S/o - Jairam Yadav, R/o-Kunnath Mohanpur, P.S. - Goradih, Dist. - Bhagalpur, was forcibly married to Gauri Devi, D/o- Shivanandan Yadav four months ago in the village Korean where my uncle Guddu Yadav’s (S/o-Late Basudev Yadav) in-laws house is situated. Since before Gauri Devi had an illicit relation with Gauri Devi’s Jeeja (sister’s husband) Karn Yadav, s/o- Prakash Yadav, R/o - Mirhatti, P.S.- Sultanganj, Dist.- Bhagalpur. Yesterday, on 11/7/15, upon getting the information of my Bhabhi’s (sister-in-law) illness, I went to my brother Shrawan Kumar’s in-laws house at Korean, from Bhagalpur to Sultanganj. My brother Shrawan Kumar’s Sadhoo (husband of wife’s sister) Karn Yadav works as a Clerk in Sultanpur Bus stand. He along with his two accomplices took my brother and me to Masoomgunj from Sultanganj by an auto. After getting down in Masoomganj near Chamru Baba Asthan (which falls under the jurisdiction of Asarganj P.S.), the two unknown accomplices who were with Karn Yadav, caught hold of my brother into their arms completely and Karn Yadav, after taking out the pistol from his own waist and inserting it into the mouth of my brother fired the shot. In the meantime, I ran away from there and reached the nearby village and explained to them about the occurrence of murder, when along with me about 30 people reached the place of occurrence, then those three persons ran away from that place. After that the I with the help of some persons brought him to Mayaganj Hospital for his treatment. After admission his treatment was started and during treatment on 12/7/15 at around4:00 am he died.

I claim that this occurrence has been committed



































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