IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Shree Chandrashekhar, Ratnaker Bhengra, JJ.
Budhan Ganjhu, son of late Puran Ganjhu- Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 726 of 2012
Decided On : 14-03-2023
Inimical Witness - Conviction under Section 302 IPC - Section 149 IPC, Section 148, 341, 307 IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act, and Section 17(i)(ii) of the CLA Act - [Ramashish Rai v. Jagdish Singh (2005) 10 SCC 498, State of Maharashtra v. Tulshiram BhanudasKamble (2007) 14 SCC 627, Masalti v. The State of U.P AIR 1965 SC 202, Joseph v. State Rep. by Inspector of Police (2018) 12 SCC 283] - The court discussed the cautious approach required in scrutinizing the evidence of inimical witnesses and the principles of vicarious liability under Section 149 IPC. The court relied on medical evidence and established the appellant's guilt under various sections of the IPC and Arms Act.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 read with 149 IPC and other sections of the IPC, Arms Act, and CLA Act based on the occurrence of a murder and related offenses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty under the mentioned sections based on the evidence presented, including medical evidence and the principles of vicarious liability under Section 149 IPC.
Issues: The issues involved the scrutiny of inimical witness testimony, the application of vicarious liability under Section 149 IPC, and the evaluation of medical evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the cautious approach required in evaluating inimical witness testimony and relied on the principles of vicarious liability under Section 149 IPC to establish the appellant's guilt.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the criminal appeal and upheld the appellant's conviction under the relevant sections.
ORDER :
Shree Chandrashekhar, J.
In Sessions Trial No. 52 of 1998, Budhan Ganjhu was charged under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code, section 27 of the Arms Act and section 17(i)(ii) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act for committing murder of Jhamman Singh with firearm.
2. The judgment of conviction dated 26th April 2012 of the appellant under section 302 read with 149 IPC, sections 148, 341 and 307 IPC as well as under section 27 of the Arms Act and section 17(i)(ii) of the CLA Act and the order of sentence dated 30th April 2012 passed in Sessions Trial No. 52 of 1998 have been challenged by the appellant by filing the present criminal appeal under sections 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr.P.C).
3. Chatra PS Case No. 104 of 1997 has been registered on the basis of the fardbeyan of Bishun Singh which was recorded on 7th September 1997 at around 10:45 AM at village Amkudar. In his statement made before the officer-in-charge of Sadar (Chatra PS), Bishun Singh has narrated incident of 6th September 1997 in which he alongwith Parmila Devi and Kawleshwar Singh Bhokta have suffered injuries and his father Jhamman Singh has died. In the said occurrence, 10 persons have died on account of firearm injuries in course of exchange of fire between two groups of people. While the investigation against other accused continued, a charge-sheet was laid against the appellant for committing the offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302 IPC, section 27 of the Arms Act and section 17(i)(ii) of the CLA Act. The autopsy over the dead body of Jhamman Singh was conducted by Dr. Shyam Nandan Singh who has found a punctured wound on the left lateral side of his neck and oval wound on his left temporal region. In the opinion of the doctor, the aforesaid injuries were caused by firearm and the time elapsed since death was between 24 to 36 hours.
4. On the basis of the materials collected in course of the investigation charges were framed against Budhan Ganjhu under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302 IPC, section 27 of the Arms Act and section 17(i)(ii) of the CLA Act, by an order dated 26th February 2001.
5. To prove the charge as framed against the appellant, the prosecution has tendered evidence through 15 witnesses out of whom Bhola Singh who was examined as PW3 is son of the deceased.
6. The learned trial Judge has appreciated the prosecution evidence in the following manner:
17. It has been argued on behalf of defence that there was no motive in the mind of accused to cause the occurrence as the motive has not been proved by the prosecution and in absence of such motive, no conviction can be warranted u/s 302 IPC. It is significant to mention here that prosecution has successfully establish that on 06.09.97 at about 11:00 AM a meeting was arranged in village Amkudar beneath the 'imali, tree and it continued till 4:00 PM when rain started and simultaneous with the rain, firing started in which 10 persons were killed at spot and several others were injured and any way survived. The circumstances clearly reveal that there was a complete preparation to make such attack on the mob collected beneath imali tree started with common design o
Ramashish Rai v. Jagdish Singh
Syad Akbar v. State of Karnataka
The main legal point established in the judgment is the cautious scrutiny of inimical witness testimony and the application of vicarious liability under Section 149 IPC.
The court ruled that evidence from interested witnesses is credible if consistent and supported by circumstances, necessitating careful evaluation of roles in unlawful assemblies under IPC.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of joint liability under section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, supported by precedents, to attribute criminal responsibility to t....
The need for caution in convicting accused based on the testimonies of injured eyewitnesses, especially in cases of free fights where injuries on the accused are not properly explained.
Failure to properly examine delay in lodging FIR can be fatal to prosecution.
The evidence must establish a premeditated intent to commit murder and the existence of an unlawful assembly with the common object of committing murder to support a conviction for murder under Secti....
The judgment established the importance of reliable witness testimony, the impact of vicarious liability under section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and the need for specific evidence to establish gu....
The court affirmed that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and testimonies of interested witnesses can be credible if corroborated by medical evidence.
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.