Back
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
VINOD PRASAD & S.K. SAHOO, JJ.
Hareram Satpathy & Another – Appellants
Versus
Premlal Suna & Others – Respondents
CRLA No. 22 of 1984
Decided On : 4.5.2015
2. CRIMINAL TRIAL - If the defence/prosecution intends to contradict the version of the medical expert by some opinion expressed in any text books or literature then such materials should be confronted to the concerned medical expert.
Thus, it should always be kept in mind that the opinions given in books are not circumstance-specific and they will have only persuasive value and they cannot be made binding unless the experts are confronted to give answer to such opinions of authors expressed by them in their textbooks. It cannot be forgotten that the experts of certain specialized field are expected to be well conversant with the opinions of authors expressed in various textbooks, to suitably answer the questions, if asked to them in their cross-examination. No doubt, opinions expressed in the text books by specialist authors are of considerable assistance but such opinions cannot be relied upon unless put to the said expert witness during his cross-examination.
(Para 8)
3. FIRST INFORMATION REPORT - Principal object to set the criminal law into motion - FIR is not the encyclopedia or be all and end all of the prosecution case - It is not a verbatim summary of the prosecution case - Non-mentioning of some facts or details or meticulous particulars is not a ground to reject the prosecution case.
(Para 11)
4. ACQUITTAL - Principle in appeal against acquittal - No embargo on the appellate Court reviewing the evidence upon which and order of acquittal is based - Detail stated.
As a matter of fact, in an appeal against acquittal, the High Court as the court of first appeal is obligated to go into greater detail of the evidence to see whether any miscarriage has resulted from the order of acquittal, though has to act with great circumspection and utmost care before ordering the reversal of an acquittal. Generally, the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with because the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. The paramount consideration of the Court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented. A miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. In a case where admissible evidence is ignored, a duty is cast upon the appellate Court to re-appreciate the evidence where the accused has been acquitted, for the purpose of ascertaining as to whether any of the accused really committed any offence or not.
(Para 17)
5. CRIMINAL TRIAL - Where there are party fractions, there is a tendency to include the innocent person with the guilty arid it is extremely difficult for the Court to guard against such a danger - The only real safe-guard against the risk of condemning the innocent with the guilty lies in insisting on acceptable evidence which in some measure implicates such accused and satisfies the conscience of the Court.
There is an incurable tendency in the factionists to rope in the innocent persons of the opposite faction along with the guilty and to twist and manipulate the facts in regard to manner of occurrence, so as to make their case appear true so far as innocent members of the opposite factions are concerned. It cannot be assumed that interested witnesses are necessarily false witnesses. However, the evidence of such witnesses must be subjected to close scrutiny and no evidence should be discarded simply because it came from the interested party.
(Para 13)
6. CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE - Extra-Judicial Confession Extra-Judicial Confession is a weak piece of evidence and requires appreciation with a great deal of care and caution - It must be established to be true and made voluntarily and that to in a fit state of mind - Details stated.
The words of the witnesses must be clear, unambiguous and should clearly convey that the accused is the perpetrator of the crime. The extra-judicial confession can be accepted, if it passes the test of credibility. The extra-judicial confession should inspire confidence and the Court should find out whether there are other cogent circumstances on record to support it. If an extrajudicial confession is surrounded by suspicious circumstances or comes from the mouth of witnesses who appear to be biased or inimical to the accused or in respect of whom it is brought out which may tend to indicate that he may have a motive of attributing an untruthful statement to the accused, needless to say that its credibility becomes doubtful and consequently it loses its importance.
(Para 12)
JUDGMENT
S.K. SAHOO, J.
1. This appeal under Section 378 Cr. P.C. has been filed by the appellants challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 30.06.1980 of the learned Sessions Judge, Bolangir-Kalahandi, Bolangir passed in Sessions Case No.37-B of 1976 and Sessions Case No.36-B of 1978 in acquitting all the nine respondents of the charges under sections 120-B, 147, 302/34 and 302/149 Indian Penal Code so also the respondent no.1 of the charge under section 302 Indian Penal Code.
At the time of hearing, it was stated at the Bar that respondent no.1-Premlal Suna, respondent no.2-Jagyan Puruseth, respondent no.4-Gunanidhi Ghasi @ Banchhor, respondent no.5-Prafulla Bhoi, respondent no.6-Sugyan Sandh and respondent no.8-Tikaram Agrawalla are dead. The learned counsel for the State on taking instruction from the concerned police station also confirmed the death of the aforesaid respondents. In view of such submissions, this Criminal Appeal stands abated as against respondent nos.1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 8 in view of the provisions under Section 394 (1) Cr. P.C.
Thus the Criminal Appeal now survives only in respect of respondent no.3-Dhobai Podh, respondent no.7-Prasanna Kumar Pal and respondent no.9-Artatrana Singhdeo.
2. The appellants preferred an application under sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 378 Cr. P.C. for grant of leave to appeal from the impugned judgment and order of acquittal before this Court on 26.09.1980 which was registered as Criminal Misc. Case No.423 of 1980. The said application was dismissed at the stage of admission on 12.01.1982. The appellants preferred an appeal by Special Leave before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the order dated 12.01.1982 of this Court for summarily dismissing the application for grant of leave. The appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was registered as Criminal Appeal No.711 of 1983. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 02.12.1983 granted leave under Section 378(4) Cr. P.C. and directed this Court to hear the appeal on merits and dispose of the same in accordance with law. After receipt of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, Criminal Misc. Case No.423 of 1980 was re-registered as the present Criminal Appeal No.22 of 1984.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused-respondents were the members of Yuva Congress Party and they were political adversaries of the deceased Parsuram Satpathy (hereafter “the deceased”), who was the brother of appellant no.1 Hareram Satpathy. The deceased was a Journalist by profession and a staunch supporter of Bharatiya Lok Dal. There was political rivalry between the parties and several criminal litigations cropped up between them prior to the date of occurrence. A case and counter case was instituted between the parties on 16.11.1974 and in that connection the deceased was arrested on 16.11.1974 and he was released on bail on 22.11.1974. Two days prior the occurrence i.e. on 27.11.1974, some of the respondent-accused persons had threatened the informant Hareram Satpathy (appellant no.1).
It is the further case of the prosecution that the occurrence took place on 29.11.1974 at about 7.30 p.m. on the road in between P.P. Academy Chhak and Bhagirathi Chhak of Balangir Town. At that time, the deceased and P.W.1 Bibhudananda Udgata were proceeding towards Bhagirathi Chhak. P.W.1 was holding his cycle. The respondents were waiting near P.P.Academy Chhak in a Congress Party Jeep. Someone sitting inside the jeep informed the other occupants about the arrival of the deceased in a loud voice. Being apprehensive of danger, the deceased took the cycle from P.W.1 and speedily proceeded towards Bhagirathi Chhak. The respondents chased the deceased in the Jeep and dashed the Jeep against the cycle of the deceased. The deceased fell down on the ground but even thereafter the respondents in order to kill the deceased brought the Jeep back by reverse gear and deliberately ran over the Jeep on the deceased for which the deceased sustained severe
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
