IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Rongon Mukhopadhyay, Ambuj Nath, JJ.
Basudeo Paswan and ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 160 of 1993 (R)
Decided On : 06-07-2022
Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Section 302/34 - [MURDER] - [Section 302/34 IPC] - The court analyzed the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence were set aside as the evidence of the sole eyewitness was found to be unreliable.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of the appellants for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Harihar Paswan. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of eyewitnesses and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of the sole eyewitness was unreliable and not credible. The court concluded that the judgment and order of conviction and sentence were not sustainable as the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
Issues: The key issue was the reliability of the eyewitness testimony and whether the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the analysis of the evidence, particularly the eyewitness testimony, and the finding that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence were set aside. The appellants were discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. A. S. Dayal, learned counsel for the appellant nos. 2 and 4, Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant no. 5 and Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. During the pendency of this appeal, the appellant no. 1 namely, Basudeo Paswan and the appellant no. 3 namely, Gendhori Paswan had expired on 16.12.2021 and 06.08.1994 respectively and accordingly vide order dated 21.04.2022, the appeal was held to have abated so far as appellant nos. 1 and 3 are concerned. This appeal therefore, survives so far as the appellant nos. 2, 4 & 5 are concerned.
3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 16.09.1993 (order of sentence passed on 17.09.1993) passed by Sri Shyam Deo Singh, Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in S. T. No. 300 of 1991 whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 4. The Fard Beyan of Ashok Paswan was recorded on 02.04.1991 at 9:00 A.M. in which it has been stated that on 01.04.1991 at about 8:30 A.M., Harihar Paswan @ Bishwanath Paswan was in an intoxicated state and after having dinner in the house of Sudeshwar Paswan, started demanding more liquor in front of the house of Srawan Yadav at which there was a quarrel and exchange of abuses between Harihar Paswan and Gendhori Paswan (original appellant no. 3 – since deceased). Basudeo Paswan (original appellant no. 1 –since deceased) who is the brother-in-law of Gendhori Paswan arrived at the scene, brought down Harihar Paswan to the ground and pressed his chest. It has been alleged that thereafter Ramchandra Paswan (original appellant no. 5), Darogi Paswan (original appellant no. 4) and Deo Narayan Paswan (original appellant no. 2) arrived at the scene and started assaulting Harihar Paswan with fists, kicks and lathis. He was taken to the house of Darogi Paswan, where the assault continued resulting in Harihar Paswan becoming unconscious. It has further been alleged that Darogi Paswan was urging the others to entrap Harihar Paswan in a case of dacoity. The informant and some other persons of the locality admitted the unconscious Harihar Paswan in Jealgora Hospital from where, he was referred for better treatment to Central Hospital, Saraidhela, Dhanbad. It has further been stated that the incident of assault was witnessed by Ramchandra Paswan, Srawan Yadav, Ramdeo Pasi, Kailash Paswan and others.
Based on the aforesaid allegations, Jorapokhar P. S. Case No. 110 of 1991 was instituted against Basudeo Paswan, Deo Narayan Paswan, Gendhori Paswan, Darogi Paswan and Ramchandra Paswan for the offences punishable under Sections 341/342/323/307/34 of Indian Penal Code. On conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the court of Sessions where it was registered as S. T. No. 300 of 1991. Charge was framed under Section 302/34 I.P.C. which was read over and explained to the accused in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution has examined as many as 8 witnesses in support of its case.
P.W. 1 – Ramdeo Pasi has not supported the prosecution case and accordingly has been declared hostile by the prosecution.
P.W. 2 – Kailash Paswan, P.W. 3 – Srawan Yadav and P.W. 4 – Ramchandra Paswan have also been declared hostile by the prosecution.
P.W. 5 – Ashok Paswan is the informant and an eye-witness to the incident. He has deposed that on 01.04.1991 at about 8:30 P.M., he was near the Shiv Mandir, where he had seen the quarrel going on between Harihar Paswan and Gendhori Paswan. He has further deposed that Basudeo Paswan, Deo Naryan Paswan and Ramchandra Paswan had thrown Harihar Paswan on the ground and by climbing on his chest were assaulting him. He has stated that Darogi Paswan had assaulted Harihar Paswan with fists while Deo Narayan Paswan
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt in criminal proceedings.
The court upheld a conviction for murder based on eyewitness testimonies, affirming that the familiarity of rural witnesses with the accused overcame visibility doubts.
The conviction upheld based on credible eyewitness testimony and medical evidence, despite the absence of independent witnesses, affirming the trial court's judgment.
Conviction for murder upheld based on consistent eyewitness accounts despite concerns about the independence of witnesses, highlighting the relevance of cohesive testimonies over minor contradictions....
The conviction for murder based solely on a solitary eyewitness's testimony was overturned due to contradictions and lack of corroboration from other witnesses.
The judgment emphasizes the need for caution in evaluating evidence in a grave crime, the requirement for independent corroboration of related witnesses, and the importance of proving the plea of ali....
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.