IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Techi Kak S/o Shri Techi Mutie – Petitioner
Versus
Taya Chumi D/o Shri Taya Tebi – Respondent
Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 4 of 2023
Decided On : 29-11-2024
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 227 and 228 - Discharge of accused - The learned trial Court discharged the respondent No. 1 for want of prima facie evidence, however, the materials on record indicated grave suspicion of involvement in the conspiracy leading to murder. The prosecution's evidence, including financial transactions and mobile phone usage, raised strong suspicion against the respondent. The Court emphasized that at the stage of framing charges, the evidence must be accepted as true and not subjected to rigorous scrutiny. (Paras 36-64)
(B) Criminal Conspiracy - The Court noted that the respondent's involvement in financial transactions and communication with co-accused indicated a potential conspiracy, warranting further examination. The learned trial Court's conclusions were deemed erroneous as they did not adequately consider the prosecution's evidence. (Paras 36-64)
JUDGMENT :
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
1. Heard Mr. Khoda Tama, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Mrinal Kumar Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. T.N. Srinivasan, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Ms. Topi Jini, learned Addl. P.P. Arunachal Pradesh, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2.
2. The present criminal revision petition has been so instituted presenting a challenge to an order, dated 09.01.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Yupia, in Sessions Case No. 02/2021 corresponding to Banderdewa Police Station Case No. 22/2020, towards discharging the respondent No. 1, herein, Ms. Taya Chumi, from the case. The petitioner has also assailed the order, dated 09.01.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Yupia, in IA (Crl.) 115/2022 in Sessions Case No. 02/2021, defreezing the bank account bearing A/c No. 916010074154305 of the said respondent No. 1 as maintained in the Axis Bank, Itanagar Branch, Itanagar.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.11.2020, at about 13.00 hours, the Officer-In-Charge, Banderdewa P.S. received telephonic information about an accident that took place near Karsingsa Block Point, in between Nirjuli and Banderdewa. Thereafter, the Officer-In-Charge, Inspector Gocham Tassa of Banderdewa P.S. and his team rushed to the spot, which is situated at a distance of 4 KM from the P.S. Having arrived at the place of occurrence, the Officer-In-Charge found that there were two persons in the vehicle at the time of accident, namely, Techi Meena Lishi, wife of Roni Lishi and her driver, resident of A Sector, Naharlagun. Both the persons were evacuated to the Hospital and later on; Techi Meena Lishi succumbed to her injuries at TRIHMS Hospital, and the driver Shri Dathang Suyang survived with minor injuries. No apparent damage to the vehicle was observed. Thereafter, the Officer-In-Charge, prepared rough sketch map of the place of occurrence, taking photographs and seized the Innova vehicle, bearing Registration No. AR-01H-3782. Later on, at about 19.00 hours, on the same day, the Officer-In-Charge received one written F.I.R. from Shri Techi Lir, to the effect that on that day at about 12.39 hours, Smti Techi Meena Lishi called him from her mobile number 8575201455 and informed him that she was going to Karsingsa on being called by her husband Shri Lishi Roni and her mother-in-law (Lishi Nami). Thereafter, at about 2.15 PM, his wife informed him that his sister Techi Meena Lishi has already died. Hence, he suspects that on 05.11.2020, in between 12.40 to 2.00 PM, at Karsingsa Block Point towards Banderdewa, one driver Dathang Suyang, under Khonsa P.S. and Shri L. Roni son of Shri Lishi Legi of A Sector, Naharlagun have murdered his sister Techi Meena Lishi with pre-planned preparation and hatching a criminal conspiracy. Upon the said F.I.R. the Officer-In-Charge, Banderdewa P.S. registered Banderdewa P.S. Case No. 22/2020, under Sections 279/304-A IPC, which was registered upon the initial telephonic information of the vehicle accident. Thereafter, the case was endorsed to Inspector Minli Geyi, Officer-In-Charge, Nirjuli P.S. for further investigation, by an order of the SDPO, Naharlagun, dated 11.11.2020, bearing no. SDPO/NLG 05/2016. Accordingly, Inspector Minli Geyi has investigated the case and after completion of investigation, he laid Charge-sheet against 7(seven) accused persons namely, (1) Lishi Roni, (2) Kapwang Letey Lowang, (3) Dathang Suyang, (4) Taney Khoiyang, (5) Damreit Khoiyang (6) Taya Chumi and (7) Bijay Biswas @ Dengu to stand trial in the Court, under Section 120B/302/316/201 IPC. While submitting the Charge-sheet, the Officer-In-Charge has informed the Court that CFSL report have not yet been received and investigation is still going on to find out more supporting facts and evidence and supplementary Charge-sheet will be filed, as per the provision of Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the learned Court below, complying the
Anant Prakash Sinha @ Ananth Sinha v. State of Haryana & Ors. (2016) 6 SCC 105
Bilal Hajar @ Abdul Hameed v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police
Ghulam Hassan Beigh v. Mohammad Maoqbool Megrey & Ors. (2022) 12 SCC 657
Mukesh & Anr. v. State for NCT of Delhi & Ors. (2017) 6 SCC 1
M.E. Shivalingamurthy v. CBI, Bengaluru
P. Vijayan v. State of Kerala & Anr. (2010) 2 SCC 398
Sajjan Kumar v. Central Bank of India
State of NCT of Delhi v. Shiv Charan Bansal
Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal & Anr. (1979) 3 SCC 4
AI
The court emphasized that at the charge framing stage, the prosecution's evidence must be accepted as true, and any grave suspicion of involvement in a conspiracy warrants further examination.
Criminal breach of trust and forgery by Bank officer – Mere depositing defalcated amount subsequently, does not exonerate accused/petitioner from charge of commission of offence which has been ultima....
The court emphasized that in matrimonial disputes, criminal charges must be supported by substantial evidence to avoid misuse of legal processes against family members.
Discharge of accused – Court is only to confined as to whether a prima facie case is made out or not – No defence on merits is to be considered at the time of framing charge and / or at stage of deci....
A discharge petition requires sufficient prima facie evidence; an absence in FIR or co-accused acquittals alone cannot substantiate discharge claims.
Criminal liability under Sections 420 IPC is negated by repayment of loans, indicating lack of wrongful loss to the bank.
The main legal point established is the requirement of grave suspicion to frame charges, the significance of tower locations and call detail records in establishing presence, and the importance of as....
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.