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

2024 Supreme(Chh) 388

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, JJ.
Girdharilal, S/o. Motilal and ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Chandrapur – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 959, 996, 1617 of 2017
Decided On : 19-02-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate, Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate, Mr. Siddharth Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Ashish Shukla, Addl. A.G., Mr. Ashish Shukla, Addl. A.G.

IMPORTANT POINT
The TIP conducted by the prosecution must be in accordance with the law, and the recovery of evidence must be of substantial value to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

TIP - Identification of Accused - Ex.P-3, Ex.P-7 & Ex.P-9 - The TIP conducted by the prosecution was not in accordance with law, and the identity of the appellants as authors of the crime was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. The recovery from the accused was of no use in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Mani v. State of Tamil Nadu and Balwan Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh. Therefore, all the accused persons were entitled to acquittal on the basis of benefit of doubt.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved the appellants being convicted for the offence under Sections 302/149 & 323/149 of Indian Penal Code for assaulting and causing the death of a person. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of witnesses who did not know the appellants prior to the date of the offence, and the recovery of weapons from the accused.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the TIP conducted by the prosecution was not in accordance with the law, and the identity of the appellants as authors of the crime was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. The recovery from the accused was of no use to the prosecution. Therefore, all the accused persons were entitled to acquittal on the basis of benefit of doubt.

Issues: The key issues revolved around the validity of the TIP conducted by the prosecution and the evidentiary value of the recovery from the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the TIP conducted by the prosecution was not in accordance with the law, and the recovery from the accused was of no use to the prosecution. Therefore, the appellants were entitled to acquittal on the basis of benefit of doubt.

Final Decision: The impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.05.2017 was set aside, and the appellants were acquitted of the charges under Section 302/149 & 323/149 of I.P.C.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. The appellants herein, Girdharilal (A-2) & Bablu @ Raja (A-4) have jointly preferred Criminal Appeal No.959/2017, Vinod (A-3) has preferred Criminal Appeal No.996/2017 and Arkhito (A-5) & Rohit Manjhi (A-6) have preferred Criminal Appeal No.1617/2017 under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.05.2017 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir- Champa, in Sessions Trial No.138/2012, by which they have been convicted for the offence under Sections 302/149 & 323/149 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced as under with a direction to run all the sentences concurrently :-

CONVICTION

SENTENCE

U/s. 302/149 of IPC

Life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/- each, in default of payment of fine, 6 months additional simple imprisonment.

U/s. 323/149 of IPC (Four Times)

Rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of payment of fine, 1 month additional simple imprison ment.

(Criminal Appeal No.1050/2017 filed by Ramkrishna (A-1) has been disposed off as having become abated by order dated 24.07.2021).

2. Since common question of law and facts are involved in these appeals and have been arisen from Sessions Trial No.138/2012, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02.05.2009, at 4:00 p.m., at Nathaldai Temple, the appellants herein in their coconut shop abused Ishwar (PW-2), Navin (PW-3), Rajkumar (PW-4), Ranjit (PW-6) and Bablu in furtherance of their common object assaulted them by hand & fists and by dangerous weapon, by which, Bablu died and caused simple injury to Ishwar (PW-2), Navin (PW-3), Rajkumar (PW-4) and Ranjit (PW-6) and also damaged the vehicle owned by Dinesh Kumar Jaiswal; thereby, the aforesaid offences have been committed. Further, case of the prosecution is that on 02.05.2009, Dilip Ratre (PW-1) had gone to Chandrahasani Temple at Chandarpur to perform the marriage of his daughter Sunita with Ashok Kumar Satnami and after completion of the marriage, he along-with others came into Mahanadi bridge and was taking coconut from the coconut shop of the appellants, then the dispute arose on account of purchasing coconut, due to which, the appellants assaulted Ishwar (PW-2), Navin (PW-3) Rajkumar (PW-4) and Ranjit (PW-6), by which, they suffered grievous injuries and on the report of complainant Dilip Kumar Ratre (PW-1), offences under Sections 294, 506 Part-II, 323 & 427 of I.P.C. were registered against the appellants vide Ex.P-1 and the injured persons were examined vide Ex.P-36, Ex.P-38, Ex.P-40, Ex.P-42 & Ex.P-44 and during course of treatment at Raipur, Bablu died, pursuant to which, merg intimation was registered vide Ex.P-35 at Police Station- Mohadapara, Raipur and dead body of deceased Bablu was subjected to post-mortem, which was conducted by Dr. E.K.Thakur (PW-19), who proved the post-mortem report Ex.P-51, in which, cause of death was stated to be cardio respiratory failure as a result of head injury and its complications and death was homicidal in nature. Pursuant to memorandum statement of Girdharilal (A-2), wooden log was seized vide Ex.P-22, pursuant to memorandum statement of Vinod (A-3), wooden stick was seized vide Ex.P-21 and on the memorandum statement of Arkhito (A-5), wooden stick was seized vide Ex.P-23, but no FSL report has been brought on record to hold that the seized articles were stained with human blood. Furthermore, the Test Identification Parade (for short “TIP”) was conducted vide Ex.P-3, Ex.P-7 & Ex.P-9 by the Executive Magistrate A.P.S. Parihar (PW-26) in the concerned Tahsil office to identify the accused persons, as Ishwar (PW-2), Navin (PW-3), Rajkumar (PW-4) and Ranjit (PW-6) did not know the appellants herein prior to date of offence, in

          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