Back
High Court of Delhi
S. RAVINDRA BHATT & S.P. GARG, JJ.
State
Versus
Sunil @ Akash @ Sagar
CRL.L.P.No.527 of 2011
Decided on : 23-01-2012
Common Intention - Murder - Section-302/34 IPC - The judgment discusses the application of Section-34 of the Indian Penal Code and the concept of common intention in a murder case. The court analyzed the testimonies and evidence to determine whether the accused shared a common intention to cause the death of the deceased. The court concluded that there was no evidence to prove that the accused had prior knowledge or shared intention to commit the murder, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent Sunil was acquitted of the charge of committing murder of Suraj. The prosecution's case was based on the allegation that Sunil and the co-accused confronted the deceased and inflicted fatal injuries, leading to his death. The Trial Court concluded that the evidence presented could not establish the accused's guilt under Section-302/34 IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that there was no evidence to prove that the accused had shared a common intention to cause the death of the deceased. The testimonies and evidence did not establish that the accused had prior knowledge or shared intention to commit the murder.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused shared a common intention to cause the death of the deceased under Section-34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for a conviction under Section-34, there must be evidence to prove that the accused had prior knowledge or shared intention to commit the crime. In the absence of such evidence, the court could not conclude otherwise.
Final Decision: The petition seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal was dismissed for lacking in merit.
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 17.02.2011 in Session Case No.138/2009. The respondent (hereinafter referred to as accused) Sunil was acquitted of the charge of having committed murder of Suraj (hereinafter referred to as deceased), punishable under Section-302/34 IPC.
2. The prosecution's case was that Rahul (PW-6), Ravi (PW-7) and the deceased were returning on 15.08.2009 at around 08:30 PM from the shop of one Bhura Halwai after purchasing milk. It was alleged that Sunil and Vipin (the co-accused) who was declared proclaimed offender confronted them from the opposite direction in a drunken condition and told Suraj that he was a bad character ("tu badmash hai apni gali ka dada banta hai"). The deceased apparently asked Sunil and Vipin to talk over their differences in the morning since they were drunk. Sunil held the deceased's hand from the back and Vipin inflicted knife injuries on Suraj on chest and then both accused fled the spot. The police was called and Suraj was taken to the SGM Hospital where he was declared dead. The statement of PW-6 Rahul formed the basis of the FIR recorded as FIR No.271/2009. After collecting the postmortem report and other materials, the respondent Sunil was charged for having committed the offence. Since Vipin could not be traced, he was declared proclaimed offender and not subjected to trial. The Trial Court concluded that the material presented before it could not form the basis for conviction under Section-302/34 IPC. The relevant part of its reasoning is found in paragraph nos.15 and 19 of the judgment which reads as follows:
Common Intention
"15. The incident pertains to 15.8.09. It is also proved that fatal injuries, as per the Post Mortem Report Ex. PW 3/A, were inflicted by the accused Vipin @ Bona who could not be arrested. As per the prosecution, the accused Sunil @ Akash only hold the hands of the deceased form the back when the accused Vipin @ Bona inflicted fatal injuries by knife to the deceased. PW-18 SI Rajesh Kumar alongwith PW-9 Ct. Nagender after receipt of DD no.43B Ex. PW 11/A reached at SGM hospital where the statement Ex. PW 6/A was recorded. The statement Ex. PW 6/A perused. In the statement Ex. PW 6/A, PW-6 Rahul stated that on 15.8.09 at about 8.30 pm he along with PW-7 Ravi and deceased were coming back from the halwai shop and when they reach near the electric transformer then accused Vipin @ Bona met them along with one of his friend. Thereafter the accused Vipin @ Bona uttered the words to the deceased that .Tu bahut zayada gali ka pradhan banta firta hai tatha bari dadagiri karta hai. and then deceased asked the accused Vipin @ Bona that they would talk in the morning as the accused Vipin @ Bona was in drunken condition. Thereafter the accused Vipin @ Bona told the deceased that today he will teach a lesson to him (deceased) and got angered and asked his friend (accused Suraj @ Akash) to hold him (deceased) from back and on this the accused Sunil @ Akash caught hold the deceased and accused Vipin @ Bona took out a knife from the pocket of his pant and inflicted injuries on the chest of deceased. What is reflecting from the statement Ex. PW 6/A made by PW-6 Rahul to PW-18 SI Rajesh Kumar that the accused Vipin @ Bona out of anger asked the accused Sunil @ Akash to caught hold of the deceased and thereafter suddenly he took out a knife and inflicted fatal blows by using knife on the chest of deceased. PW-6 Rahul made improvements in his deposition and as per the deposition that accused Sunil @ Akash and accused Vipin @ Bona came together and thereafter accused Sunil @ Bona hold the hands of the deceased from back and accused Vipin @ Bona stabbed a knife on the chest of deceased."
XXX XXX XXX
19. It is apparent from the respective testimonies of PW-6 Rahul and PW-7 Ravi and statement Ex. PW 6/A that accused Sunil @ Akash and Vipin @ Bona were not having any
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
