Back
2018 Supreme(Jhk) 783
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
KAILASH PRASAD DEO, J.
Kripa Gope @ Kripa Singhu, S/o Late Bhagwat Gope – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1007 of 2003
Decided On : 03-08-2018
For the Appellant :Ms. Amrita Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Pankaj Verma, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Suraj Mohan, Additional Public Prosecutor
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for consistent and credible evidence in criminal cases, and the prejudice caused by the absence of crucial witness examinations.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Criminal Appeal - Sections 324, 307 - [SUMMARY OF ACT SECTIONS]
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the appellant being convicted for offenses under Sections 324 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code for firing a gun and causing injuries to the informant and others. The appellant challenged the conviction on the grounds of contradictions in the prosecution's case and lack of evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found vital contradictions in the evidence presented by the prosecution, including discrepancies in the sequence of events and the nature of injuries sustained. The non-examination of the investigating officer and forensic expert caused prejudice to the appellant. Consequently, the court acquitted the appellant of the charges and set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the prosecution's case, contradictions in the evidence, and the absence of crucial examination of witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the vital contradictions in the prosecution's case, lack of evidence, and the prejudice caused to the appellant due to non-examination of key witnesses. These factors led to the acquittal of the appellant.
Final Decision: The court allowed the criminal appeal, set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, and discharged the appellant from the liability of the bail bond.
Heard, learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Amrita Banerjee assisted by Mr. Pankaj Verma, Advocates and Mr. Suraj Verma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State.
2. The instant criminal appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction, dated 10.06.2003 and order of sentence, dated 17.06.2003, in Sessions Trial No.258 of 1989 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-IV, Bokaro, whereby the sole appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 324 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded rigorous imprisonment for one year and rigorous imprisonment for seven years respectively. By the said impugned judgment, two other co-accused persons have been acquitted by the learned trial Court.
3. The prosecution case is based upon the fardbeyan of Sona Ram Gope (P. W. 7) recorded by Sub-Inspector N. K. Singh, Pindrajora Police Station on 27.08.1985 at 11.30 p.m., where the informant has alleged that his son-in-law Kripa Gope used to assault his daughter Buluna Gwalin and after assault, he has sent his wife to the house of the informant with his younger brother, Haren Gope, one week ago before the date of occurrence. It is alleged by the informant that yesterday i.e on 26.08.1985, his son-in-law came to the house of the informant to meet his wife but the informant refused on the ground of illness of his daughter and has assured that after one week, he may take her or the informant himself will bring her to Sasural. Upon this, the son-in-law abused the informant and stayed at night in the house of the co-villager Kiran Gope. It is further alleged that today i.e. on 27.08.1985, in the morning son-in-law came again and abused the informant and again went to the house of Kiran Gope. It is alleged that at around 8.00 p.m. in the night, the accused Kripa Gope came to the house of the informant and fired with a gun causing injury to the informant. When Kirti Singh and Karuna Devi came for the rescue of the informant, then the accused also fired upon them, due to which both of them also got injured. The informant has stated that the firing was made by his son-in-law Kripa Gope along with his elder brother Yogendra Gope and one unknown person, whose face could not be remembered because of darkness. The informant has claimed that his son-in-law Kripa Gope, Yogendra Gope and one unknown person fired from a gun causing injury upon him, Kiti Singh and daughter Karuna Devi.
4. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, Police instituted First Informant Report bearing Pindrajora P. S. Case No. 69 of 1985 dated 28.8.1985 under sections 307 and 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
5. After investigation, the police submitted chargesheet against three accused persons Yogendra Gope, Kripa Gope and Haren Gope, all sons of Bhagu Gope, vide charge-sheet No.52 of 1986 dated 30th September, 1986, under Sections 307, 324, 316, 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
6. The cognizance of the offence has been taken vide order dated 4.10.1986 and the case has been committed to the court of Sessions vide order dated 26.06.1989.
7. The learned trial Court has framed charge against all three accused persons under Sections 324/34, 326/34, 316/34, 498A/34, 307/34 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code vide order dated 6.10.1993, to which the accused persons have pleaded their innocence and thus, they were put under trial.
8. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined altogether ten witnesses and also exhibited a number of documentary evidences. Batul Gope (son of the informant) has been examined as P. W. 1, Guru Gope (nephew of the informant) has been examined as P. W. 2, Ramu Gope (brother of the informant) has been examined as P. W. 3, Arjun Singh has been examined as P. W. 4, Smt. Purna Devi (wife of the appellant and daughter of the informant) has been examined as P. W. 5, Smt. Karuna Devi (another daughter of the informant and one of the injure
