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

1964 Supreme(HP) 2

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
OM PARKASH
ROSHAN LA - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Criminal Appeals Nos. 12 and 24 of 1963
Decided On : 03/11/1964

Advocates Appeared:
Roshan Lal (Appellant) with Dalip Singh, for Appellant K.C. Pandit, Govt. Advocate, for Respondent. In Cri Appeal No. 24 of 1963. K.C. Pandit, Govt. Advocate, for Appellant Hari Nand and Yasin (Respondents) with Ishwar Chand, for Respondents.

A retracted confession can form the basis of a conviction if it was voluntarily made and is true and if it is corroborated by independent evidence.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - Murder - Confession - Voluntariness - Corroboration - Acquittal - Interference - Principles.

Fact of the Case:

Roshan Lal, Hari Nand, and Yasin were accused of murdering Sant Ram, a forest guard. Roshan Lal was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, while Hari Nand and Yasin were acquitted. Roshan Lal appealed against his conviction and sentence, while the Union of India appealed against the acquittal of Hari Nand and Yasin.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the confessional statement made by Roshan Lal was voluntary and true and was corroborated by independent evidence. The court also held that the acquittal of Hari Nand and Yasin was justified as there was no independent evidence establishing their guilt.

Issues: 1. Whether the confessional statement made by Roshan Lal was voluntary and true. 2. Whether the confessional statement was corroborated by independent evidence. 3. Whether the acquittal of Hari Nand and Yasin was justified.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the confessional statement made by Roshan Lal was voluntary and true based on the following factors: a) The Magistrate took precautions to ensure that Roshan Lal was making the statement voluntarily. b) Roshan Lal was given ample time to reflect on whether or not to make the statement. c) There was no evidence or circumstances to suggest that Roshan Lal was subjected to any beating or pressure to make the statement. 2. The court held that the confessional statement was corroborated by independent evidence, including: a) The discovery of the dead body of Sant Ram, his belt, cap, and other articles from the place of occurrence. b) The discovery of the wristwatch belonging to Sant Ram from Bhupal Singh. c) The evidence of Om Prakash, who testified that Roshan Lal had told him that he had murdered Sant Ram. 3. The court held that the acquittal of Hari Nand and Yasin was justified as there was no independent evidence establishing their guilt. The court noted that the confessional statement of Roshan Lal could not be used against them as it could only be used to lend assurance to other independent evidence, which was lacking in this case.

Final Decision: The appeal of Roshan Lal was dismissed, and the appeal of the Union of India against the acquittal of Hari Nand and Yasin was also dismissed.

JUDGEMENT

1. Roshan Lal, Hari Nand and Yasin, residents of Misarwala Tehsil Paonta, district Sirmur, were committed, to the Court of Sessions Judge, Mahasu, Sirmur, Bilaspur and Kinnaur Sessions Division in connection with the murder of Sant Ram, Forest Guard, who was in-charge Majra, forest beat, Tehsil Paonta. The learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced Roshan Lal. under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., but acquitted Hari Nand and Yasin. Roshan Lal has filed Criminal Appeal No. 12/63 against his conviction and sentence. The Union of India has filed Criminal No, 24/63 against the acquittal of Hari Nand and Yasin. This judgement will dispose of both the appeals.

2. The prosecution case against Roshan Lal., Hari Nand and Yasin. accused, was as follows : The relations, between Sant Ram and the villagers, including the residents of Misarwala village, had become strained as Sant Ram used to maintain a strict watch over the forest, in the discharge of his official duties and did not permit the villagers to cut and steal wood from the forest.

3. Roshan Lal accused, who had worked, for sometime, as a domestic servant with Hari Nand accused, and had then left his service, was called by the latter and was persuaded, on promise of paying the arrears of his salary to assist him (Hari Nand) in stealing wood from the forest. Roshan Lal and Hari Nand had stolen a log of sal wood from the forest, near about the month of March 1962. Sant Ram had seized that log from the possession of Hari Nand. This had embittered Hari Nand. Determined to avenge himself, Hari Nand had hatched a conspiracy with Roshan- Lal and Yasin to murder Sant Ram. The plan was that Sant Ram should be decoyed to Kuiwala forest, on the pretext of apprehending an offender, stealing wood and should be done to death there. It was agreed that Yasin should go to the forest and cut wood and that Roshan Lal and Hari Nand should decoy Sant Ram to the forest. In pursuance of the conspiracy, Sant Ram was on the 11th March, 1962 at about 4 or 5 P.M., decoyed to Kuiwala forest by Roshan Lal. Yasin was cutting wood there. Sant Ram had snatched the Kulhari from Yasin. But Yasin had taken, back the Kulhari and had also snatched the safajang which Sant Ram was carrying. Yasin had hinted to Roshan Lal that he should strike Sant Ram. Roshan Lal had, accordingly, struck a blow at the neck of Sant Ram, with a darat, which had been supplied to him by Hari Nand, while he was leaving for the forest. Yasin had also given blows at the head and face of Sant Ram with the safajang. Sant Ram had died at the spot. Many articles, such as wrist-watch, belt, purse containing money, were removed by Roshan Lal and Yasin from the dead body. They had returned to their village in the night. Roshan Lal had met Mohammad Ishaq, who was a tutor in Misarwala mosque. In reply to the enquiry as to wherefrom he was coming at that time of the night, Roshan Lal had informed Mohammad Ishaq that he and Yasin had murdered Sant Ram. On the morning of the 12th March, Roshan Lal and Yasin had, again, gone to Kuiwala forest. They had buried the dead-body of Sant Ram in a pit in the khala. The belt, cap and other articles, removed from the dead-body were concealed in a nearby place. The Forest Guards hammer and the safajang, which were being carried by Sant Ram, were also hidden in the forest. After collecting faggots of wood, Roshan Lal and Yasin, had come back to their village. On their way back, they had met Mohammad Ishaq, who was cutting grass in his land. On Mohammad Ishaqs felling them that, on the previous night, Roshan Lal had informed him that he and Yasin had done to death Sant Ram. Roshan Lal and Yasin had fallen on his feet and had said :- "Ham se bahut zulm ho gaya hai. Dar asal apko malum hai kih Sant Ram guard ne ghas pati ke liye sare goan ko tang kar rakha tha, is waja se hamne usko mar dala."

4. Roshan Lal and Yasin had left the village Misarwala a after the incident Roshan Lal had wandered from one place to an























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