Back
1996 Supreme(HP) 77
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
KAMLESH SHARMA,R.L,KHURANA
JAGDISH KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 1995
Decided On : 05/15/1996
For the appellant(s) :M. S. Chandel, Advocate with Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate. For the respondent(s):C. L. Sharma Additional Advocate General with Ashok Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL - Murder - Section 302 read with section 34, I.P.C. - Conviction - Appeal - Appreciation of evidence - Dying declaration - Admissibility - Identification of accused - Recovery of empty cartridge - Medical evidence - Range of firing - Discrepancies in evidence - Effect - Forensic Science Laboratory report - Admissibility - Minor discrepancies - Effect - Appeal dismissed.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted under section 302 read with section 34, I.P.C. for murdering Babu Ram. The prosecution case was that on 1-7-1991 at 10.10 p.m., the appellants had shot Babu Ram dead. The main evidence against the appellants was the dying declaration of Babu Ram, the testimony of his wife Kamla Devi, and the recovery of an empty cartridge from the scene of the crime.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the dying declaration of Babu Ram was admissible in evidence and that it was corroborated by the testimony of Kamla Devi. The court also held that the recovery of the empty cartridge from the scene of the crime was properly proved and that it linked the appellants to the crime. The court rejected the appellants' arguments that the identification of the appellants was unreliable and that the medical evidence did not support the prosecution's case. The court also held that the minor discrepancies in the evidence were not sufficient to create a reasonable doubt as to the appellants' guilt.
Issues: 1. Whether the dying declaration of Babu Ram was admissible in evidence? 2. Whether the identification of the appellants was reliable? 3. Whether the recovery of the empty cartridge from the scene of the crime was properly proved? 4. Whether the medical evidence supported the prosecution's case? 5. Whether the minor discrepancies in the evidence were sufficient to create a reasonable doubt as to the appellants' guilt?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the dying declaration of Babu Ram was admissible in evidence because it was made in a conscious state of mind and it was corroborated by other evidence. 2. The court held that the identification of the appellants was reliable because it was made by eyewitnesses who knew the appellants well. 3. The court held that the recovery of the empty cartridge from the scene of the crime was properly proved because it was made in the presence of witnesses and it was linked to the gun used in the crime. 4. The court held that the medical evidence supported the prosecution's case because it showed that Babu Ram died from gunshot wounds. 5. The court held that the minor discrepancies in the evidence were not sufficient to create a reasonable doubt as to the appellants' guilt because they were not material to the main issue of whether the appellants had committed the murder.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed.
Miss Kamlesh Sharma, J.—In this appeal the appellants have challenged judgment dated 31-12-1994 passed by Sessions Judge, Bilaspur whereby they have been convicted under section 302 read with section 34, I P,C and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs, 3,000 each, and in default of payment of fine they shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.
2. The prosecution story emerging from the evidence on record is that on 1-7-1991 at 10 10 p. m. Shankar Singh, Constable No, 94, PW 5 posted at Police Station Sadar Bilaspur, received telephone call from Dy, Superintendent of Police Daljit Singh that he was informed on telephone by one Hardyal Singh from village Dharsani that one Babu Ram had been shot dead and injured by someone. On receipt of this information Shankar Singh PW 5 recorded daily diary report No 28 Ex. PCX There-after, ASI Kaur Chand PW 16 alongwith ASI Birbal Ram PW 15, Shankar Singh PW 5 and two more constables proceeded to the place of occurrence at village Dharsani in Jeep No. HIB 88. On reaching village Dharsani, they noticed that Babu Ram, who had received injuries on his left arm and on his abdomen, was being removed to the hospital on a cot by the villagers. ASI Kaur Chand PW 16 recorded his statement under section 154, Cr. P. C. and sent it through Kuldip Singh Constable No. 300 to Police Station Sadar Bilaspur for registration of a case at 12.45 a, m on 2 7-1991, on the basis of which F. I. R. No 94/91 was recorded at 3.00 a, m,, which is Ex. PS/1 on the record.
3. In his statement Ex PS Babu Ram gave the full account of the incident that on his return to his house from his work at 8.00 p. m. he found that his wife had gone to fetch water from Kakkarughat Nala. At about 9.00 p. m he also proceeded towards Kakkarughat to see his wife and when he reached near a Simble tree, he found appellants Jeet Ram, Member, Balak Ram, Compounder and Jagdish Kumar, Peon Veterinary Hospital at Rishikesh, sitting on a parapet on the left side of the road , indulging in vulgar and filthy talk. He told them that if they had mothers and sisters in their houses they would not have talked in such a vulgar and filthy manner. In the meantime, his wife reached on the spot with a pitcher of water and seeing her they started talking more loudly. Thereafter they induldged in wordy duel with Babu Ram and then appellants Jit Ram and Balak Ram asked appellant Jagdish Kumar to fire at him and to not mind the consequences. At this appellant Jagdish Kumar fired at Babu Ram with the gun which he w as holding at that time and the shot thereof hit Babu Ram below his navel after piercing through his left wrist. On this, his wife raised alarm and called his brother Prem Lal PW 14, who reached on the spot besides number of villagers. Seeing them the appellants fled away from the scene of occurrence taking alongwith them the gun used in the commission of crime, Babu Ram has further stated that with the intention to kill him, appellant Jagdish Kumar had fired at him with the gun at the instance of appellants Jit Ram and Balak Ram, as a result of which he received injuries in his stomach and arm, and was having severe pain According to him, he was being carried to Bilaspur on a cot when he met ASI Kaur Chand on the way to whom he got his statement recorded.
4. The statement of Babu Ram bears his right thumb-impression, which he had appended after it was read over and explained to him, as stated in the endorsement made therein by ASI Kaur Chand PW 16. Thereafter Babu Ram injured was sent to District Hospital, Bilaspur in an ambulance with a request for his medical examination by ASI Kaur Chand PW 16 vide his letter Ex. PL, on which time and date recorded is 12.30 p.m. on 2-7-1991. On reaching hospital, Babu Ram was medically examined by Medical Officer, District Hospital, Bilaspur Dr. Rama Singh PW 3, who had issued medico legal certificate Ex. PK. On her advice, injured Babu Ram was X-rayed and repor
