IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, NAVNEET KUMAR, JJ.
Ramadhir Singh @ Ramadhin Singh, son of Late Chandi Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 338 of 2015
Decided on : 27-09-2023
Eyewitness - Criminal Law
Fact of the Case:
The court found the eyewitness testimony to be consistent and credible, negating the defense's contentions regarding the presence of the informant at the place of occurrence and the alleged contradictions among the eyewitnesses. The court also dismissed the defense's arguments regarding the delay in dispatching the FIR and the non-examination of certain witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the eyewitness testimony to be reliable and credible, and the prosecution was able to establish the charges beyond all reasonable doubt.
Issues: Credibility of eyewitness testimony, alleged contradictions among eyewitnesses, delay in dispatching the FIR, non-examination of certain witnesses
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for careful assessment and evaluation of eyewitness testimony, highlighting that minor discrepancies and contradictions do not necessarily affect the credibility of the witnesses. The court also emphasized that the absence of an explanation for certain aspects does not necessarily discredit the prosecution case.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court were upheld.
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant appeal, filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 09.04.2015 and order of sentence dated 18.04.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge VII, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2000, by which the appellant-Ramadhir Singh @ Ramadhin Singh has been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act; and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence committed and punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I for three years for the offence committed and punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
Facts of the Case:
2. This Court, before proceeding to examine the legality and propriety of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, deems it fit and proper to refer the background of institution of prosecution case, as per fardbeyan of informant, namely Dun Bahadur Singh (P.W. 10), which reads as under:
3. The fardbeyan of the informant Dun Bahadur Singh (P.W.10), who is a resident of Sijua More, P.S. Jogta, District Dhanbad, was recorded by Sub-Inspector of Police R.N. Tiwary, Officer-in-Charge Katras Police Station at 09.15 Hours on 15.07.1998 near the place of occurrence i.e., Katras Hatia Road near Shahid Bhagat Singh Chowk, on the basis of which F.I.R was instituted on 15.07.1998 at 11.30 Hours, wherein it is stated that on 15.07.1998 at 8.00 hours he (informant) was going from his house situated at Sijua More to Katras Coal Dump by his Mahindra Jeep bearing registration No. BR-17E 0098, which was driven by him. His younger brother, Binod Singh was going ahead of him, from his new Ambassador Car, which was driven by Binod Singh‘s driver namely, Manu Ansari. When they were crossing the densely populated Panchgarhi market and reached near Shahid Bhagat Singh Chowk, Katras Hatia, at about 8.40 hours one white Maruti Car, which was coming from back side, overtook the both the vehicles and stopped. After being stopped, from the vehicle three persons got down and started firing indiscriminately from automatic firearms upon the vehicle of Binod Singh. At that time informant‘s vehicle was 50 yards from the victim‘s vehicle. Due to fear, the informant remained there.
4. After making about more than fifty rounds of firing the accused persons ran to sit in the Maruti Car and fled away towards Rajganj speedily. Informant rushed towards the victim‘s vehicle and saw that the said vehicle was badly damaged and further Binod Singh and his driver Manu Ansari were fallen in the car in the pool of blood. Thereafter several persons also assembled there.
5. It is further stated that the informant immediately thereafter rushed to Tila Tand Central Hospital from his jeep and brought Dr. Uma Shankar to the place of occurrence, who saw the victims (Binod Singh and his driver Manu Ansari) and declared both of them dead.
Informant has further stated that he has seen the accused persons and has identified them.
6. Informant has named the accused persons as Ramadhin Singh (brother of late Surajdeo Singh, Ex. MLA), Rajeev Ranjan Singh (son of Surajdeo Singh) aged 25 years. The third person was of general height having small beard and hair from the front was bald and wore jeans pant, about whom he stated that he could recognize but did not know his name. All the accused persons were firing from automatic weapon and after firing Ramadhin Singh, the appellant herein, asked them to flee away uttering that the work has been done.
7. It has further been stated in the fardbayan that the murder of Binod Singh was committed due to old existing enmity on instigation by accused Bachcha Singh in his conspiracy with all the accused persons.
8. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant, a formal F.I.R. being Katras P.S Case No. 232 of 1998 dated 15.07.1998 was registered under Sections 302/120B/34
Anil Rai v. State of Bihar [(2001) 7 SCC 318 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 1009]
Anjan Dasgupta v. State of W.B.
Aqeel Ahmad v. State of U.P. [(2008) 16 SCC 372 : (2010) 4 SCC (Cri) 11]
Amar Singh &Ors. Vs. Balwinder Singh & Ors. (2003) 2 SCC 518
Anant Prakash Sinha v. State of Haryana
Bhagwan Jagannath Markad & Ors. Vrs. State of Maharashtra
Bhajan Singh Vs. State of Haryana [(2011) 7 SCC 421]
Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar reported in (1997) 1 SCC 283
Budhsingh Vs. State of M.P. [(2013) 7 SCC 629]
Chittar Lal v. State of Rajasthan
Guli Chand v. State of Rajasthan [(1974) 3 SCC 698 : 1974 SCC (Cri) 222 : AIR 1974 SC 276]
Gangadhar Behera v. State of Orissa, (2002) 8 SCC 381, pp. 392-93
Harpal Singh Vs. Devinder Singh (1997) 6 SCC 660
Jarnail Singh and Anr. Vs. State of Punjab [2009 9 SCC 719]
Jagdish Prasad v. State of M.P. [1995 SCC (Cri) 160 : AIR 1994 SC 1251]
Kartik Malhar v. State of Bihar [(1996) 1 SCC 614 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 188]
Kathi Bharat VasjurVs. State of Gujrat [(2012) 5 SCC 724]
Leela Ram v. State of Haryana, (1999) 9 SCC 525, pp. 532-35
Mohd. Sugal Esa Mamasan Rer Alalah v. R. [AIR 1946 PC 3 : 1946 All LJ 100]
Meharaj Singh v. State of U.P.
P. Kartikalakshmi Vs. Sri Ganesh [(2017) 3 SCC 347]
Pala Singh v. State of Punjab [(1972) 2 SCC 640 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 55]
Rabindra Mahto v. State of Jharkhand
Rafiq Ahmad @ Rafi vs State of Uttar Pradesh [(2011) 8 SCC 300]
Ramvir Vs. State of U.P. [(2009) 15 SCC 254]
Shri Bhagwan v. State of Rajasthan [(2001) 6 SCC 296 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 1095]
Sudarshan v. State of Maharashtra
State of Rajasthan v. Daud Khan
Sarvesh Narain Shukla Vs. Daroga Singh [(2007) 13 SCC 360]
Sheo Shankar Singh v. State of U.P.
Shyamal Ghosh v. State of West Bengal
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Naresh [(2011) 4 SCC 324]
Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab [(1976) 4 SCC 369 : 1976 SCC (Cri) 646]
Ugar Ahir Vs. State of Bihar [AIR 1965 SC 277]
Virubhai Ranchodbhai Patel Vs. Rajeev Bhai Dudha Bhai Patel [(2018) 7 SCC 743]
Vadivelu Thevar v. State of Madras [AIR 1957 SC 614 : 1957 Cri LJ 1000]
Vahula Bhushan v. State of T.N. [1989 Supp (1) SCC 232 : 1989 SCC (Cri) 353 : AIR 1989 SC 236]
Conviction for murder by unlawful assembly sustainable on reliable sole eyewitness to killing, corroborated by medical evidence and abduction witnesses, despite FIR delay, witness non-examination, an....
Delay in FIR and pre-FIR inquest not vitiating trial absent prejudice; reliable natural witness testimony, corroborated by medical/weapon evidence, suffices for murder conviction despite inconclusive....
Point of law: Every person who witnesses a murder reacts in his own way. Some are stunned, become speechless and stand rooted to the spot. Some become hysteric and start wailing. Some start shouting ....
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.