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

2017 Supreme(Gau) 1228

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (KOHIMA BENCH)
SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO, J.
Ato Yimchunger and Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Nagaland and Ors. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2 (K) of 2010
Decided On : 19-08-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : S. Dutta, Sr. Adv., B. Devnath, Alem Pongener, M. Wabang and Enchang.
For the Respondent: V. Suokhrie, Addl. Sr. Adv. Government Adv.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code - Section 313(1)(b) – Acquitted – Right - Incident an FIR - Conscious of fact that an appellant or provisional Court shall make serious Endeavour to rectify defect of trial Courts omission to put to accused incriminating pieces of evidence appearing against him by asking counsel for accused even at appellate stage – Held, As persons trained in handling of lethal weapon such as rifle they should have known impact such weapon can cause once shots are fired from such guns - It may be true that they fired at the tires of vehicle in order to prevent victims from escaping so as to ascertain their identity in order to safe guard security of Minister of which they were in-charge - Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT :

SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO, J.

1. This is an appeal under Section 372(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, directed against the judgment and order, dated 25-2-2008, passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Dimapur, Nagaland, in G.R. Case No. 256/1999, convicting the appellants under Section 372(2) of IPC and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 7 years and fine of Rs. 25,000/- each and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 (one) year. The brief background of the case is as follows;

On 29-5-1999 at about 5:30 p.m. while the appellants were on escort duty of the then Minister of Road & Bridges along with four other personnel of Nagaland Armed Police, namely Shri, Lipok Ao, S.I., Shri. Akaho Sumi, Constable, Shri. Yingphong Konyak, Constable and Shri. Onen Ao, Constable Driver and were proceeding towards the Minister's residence at Dimapur, they came across one Maruti Zen Car bearing Registration No. NL-01-25523 at 6th Mile near Petrol Pump which was driven by one Mr. Michael Mary with two of his friends namely, Mr. Atina Suokhrie and Mr. Pangertemsu Ao in it. While the two vehicles i.e. escort vehicle of the Minister and Maruti Zen car were passing each other they nearly had a head on collision, and on instinctive reaction the occupants of the Maruti Zen car shouted at the escort party. After reaching the Minister's residence, the escort party went after the Maruti Zen car and found it parked at the road side between Patkai Bridge and the Chumukedima Police Check Gate. After the escort vehicle passed by the Maruti Zen car and as soon as the appellants and their party got down from the vehicle the three boys turn their Maruti Zen car and started driving towards Dimapur. The Oikuce escort on seeing the boys driving away started firing at them with their service weapons. In the firing Michael who was driving the vehicle and his friends Atina Suokrie and Pangertemsu Ao suffered serious injuries. Michael survived for that time but died after few days at a hospital in Delhi, Mr. Atina Suokrie died instantly at the spot and Pangertemsu Ao had his right hand amputated due to the injuries suffered in the firing.

Following the incident an FIR was registered at Diphupar Police Station being Diphupar Police Station Case No. 42/1999, under Sections 302/307/326/34, IPC. After the investigation was completed charge-sheet was filed and the case was tried by the Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Dimapur by registering G.R. Case No. 256/1999. The learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Dimapur, vide his order, dated 18-12-2002, passed in G.R. Case No. 256/1999, acquitted all the accused from the charge against them by giving them benefit of doubt. The State of Nagaland preferred an appeal against the acquittal judgment and the same was registered as Criminal Appeal No. 1(K) of 2003 in the Kohima Bench of this High Court. The Division Bench of this High Court by order, dated 17-5-2007 set aside the acquittal judgment and order of the Addl. Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Dimapur, and sent back the record to the Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Dimapur, to examine the accused persons in terms of the provision of Section 313(1)(b) of Cr. P.C. and then to dispose the case in accordance with law. The relevant portion of the judgment and order is reproduced here below :

"29. Conscious of the fact that an appellant or revisional Court shall make serious endeavour to rectify the defect of the trial Court's omission to put to the accused incriminating pieces of evidence appearing against him by asking the counsel for the accused, even at the appellate stage, to say as to what explanation if any, the accused has to offer to such incriminating pieces of materials on record, when we concentrate on the case at hand, we are confronted with a wholly undesirable situation inasmuch as we notice, as we have already indicated above, that the learned Court below has not put to any of the ac
















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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