1995 Supreme(All) 403

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S. C. JAIN, I. S. MATHUR
NAURANGI LAL - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - Respondents
Criminal Appeal 2369 Of 1980
Decided On : 03/30/1995

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - CONVICTION - EVIDENCE - WITNESSES - INTERESTED WITNESSES - TESTIMONY - SCRUTINY - CORROBORATION - MEDICAL EVIDENCE - FIRST INFORMATION REPORT - ANTE-TIMING - INCONSISTENCY - FALSEHOOD - SEPARATION OF TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD - LEGAL PRINCIPLES.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, Naurangi Lal, along with Bhagwant and Pati Ram, were convicted under Sections 302/34 and 307/34, I.P.C., for the murder of Patiram and causing injuries to Maharaj Singh. Bhagwant died during the pendency of the appeal, and the appeal against him was delinked. The deceased Patiram was the real brother of the complainant Mani Ram, and Maharaj Singh was the son of the complainant. The accused Pati Ram and Naurangi Lal were real brothers, and Bhagwant was their father. The accused and the complainant and the deceased were residents of the same village. On 14-10-1979, the appellant, along with other accused, encroached upon the land in possession of Mani Ram by digging foundation and constructing foundation wall. This was objected to by Maharaj Singh and others. The complainant Mani Ram along with the deceased Patiram were working on their rehat at about 12 noon. They heard the shouts of Maharaj Singh and rushed towards the village Abadi. They found that the accused Pati Ram son of Bhagwant and Bhagwant armed with lathis and Naurangi Lal armed with the licensed gun of this brother were quarrelling with the children. The complainant said to them that they have dug up a foundation illegally and on the top of it they are quarrelling. On shouts being raised Chob Singh and other persons came there. The accused attacked the complainant and others with lathis and gun causing injuries to Pati Ram and his son Maharaj Singh. A first information report of this incident was lodged by Mani Ram on 14-10-1979 at 2 p.m. at police station Kotwali, district Etah and a case under Section 307, I.P.C. was registered Pati Ram, who was live till then, and Maharaj Singh were sent to the hospital where PW 2 Dr. R. P. Dixit examined them. He found the following injuries on their person :-Pati Ram1. Abraded contusion 3 cm. x 3 cm. on the left side front of chest left side 5 cm. above the left nipple and 7 cm. below the left clavicle. 2. Abrasion 3 cm. x 1 cm. on the left side of abdomen 3 cm. below the left lower border of rib. 3. One firearm wound of entry 1 cm. x 1 cm. on the left side of abdomen 7 cm. from the mid line and 7 cm. below the lower border, of rib left side. It is cavity deep, probing not done due to surgical reasons. ( 4 ) EIGHT firearm wounds of entry each 1 cm. x 1 cm. , probing not done due to surgical reasons depth could not be ascertained bleeding profusely. It is in the left groin area in an area of 15 cm. x 10 cm. ( 5 ) ABRASION 3 cm. x 3 cm. on the outer side of left thigh upper part in the G. T. of femur area. Injuries Nos. 1, 2 and 5 were simple and appear to have been caused by friction with some hard object while injuries Nos. 3 and 4 were kept under observation and were caused by firearm. Maharaj Singh1. One firearm wound of entry 1 cm. x 1 cm. on the right side of abdomen 2 cm. from mid line and 2 cm. above umbilicus. It is cavity deep, no bleeding present probing not done due to surgical reasons. 2. On firearm of entry 1 cm. x 1 cm. on the lower border of rib, cavity deep, probing not done due to surgical reasons, no bleeding present. Advised X-ray. 3. One firearm wound of entry, 1 cm. x 1 cm. x muscle deep on the right side front and middle part. Margins inverted and lacerated. No bleeding present, direction backward and horizontal. Advised X-ray. Injury No. 3 was simple while injuries Nos. 1 and 2 were kept under observation. X-ray was advised in respect of all the three injuries which were caused by fire arm for confirmation of pellets. 4. Pati Ram died at 2. 35 p.m. on 14-10-1979 inetah Hospital and information of the same was sent to police, vide Ex. Ka 4. 5. On post mortem examination PW 3 Dr. L. S. Raizada found the following ante mortem injuries on the person of the deceased Pati Ram :-l. Abraded contusion x 3 cm. x 3 cm. on the left chest from 6 cm. above the left nipple. 2. Abrasion 3 cm. x 1 cm. transverse on the left side abdomen 3 cm. below the lower rib margin. 3. One firearm wound of entry 1 cm. x 1 cm. on the left side rib abdomen 7 cm. , below the left rib margin and 7 cm. away from the mid line. It is cavity deep. Margins inverted and lacerated. No blackening present. Direction posterio medially. 4. Multiple firearm wounds of entry in an area of 15 cm. x 10 cm. on the left groin margins inverted and lacerated. No blackening present. Some are skin deep few muscle deep and P. cavity deep, backward oblique left to right5. Abrasion 3 cm. x 3 cm. on the outer side upper part left thigh in the trochantaric region. ( 6 ) THREE firearm wounds of exit in the right geuteal region, margins everted and lacerated in an area of 10 cm. x 8 cm. 0n internal examination, there was echymosis in the walls as mentioned in injury No. 3. The peritoneum was lacerated below injury No. 3. and two pints of clotted blood was present in the cavity. The measentry was grossly lacerated and echymosed in the small intestines from which one pellet was recovered and sealed. The large intestines were 1/4 full with faecal matter and loop of the large intestines was lacerated in the descending colour. The bladder was grossly lacerated and echemosed and free and clotted blood was present in the pelvic cavity. One pellet was recovered from the same. There was fracture of pelvis left illiac bone had comminuted fracture. Two pellets were recovered from that injury. One pellet was recovered from the left gelted region in the muscles. According to the doctor the stomach contained 6 ozs. of semi digested food and faecal matter was present in the large intestine. In all five pellets were recovered from the body of the deceased Pati Ram. In the opinion of the doctor death was due to shock and haemorrhage on account of injuries Nos. 3 and 4. 6. After completing the investigation the Investigating Officer submitted a charge-sheet against all the aforementioned three accused.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the prosecution had succeeded in proving the motive for the crime, that there was a consistent version given by the prosecution witnesses, that the medical evidence fully supported the prosecution version, and that the first information report could not be said to be doubtful. The Court also found that the statements of the prosecution witnesses could not be discarded on the ground of their being interested witnesses, and that the acquittal of one of the accused did not lead to the inference that the prosecution version against the appellant was also doubtful.

Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had succeeded in proving the motive for the crime. 2. Whether there was a consistent version given by the prosecution witnesses. 3. Whether the medical evidence fully supported the prosecution version. 4. Whether the first information report could be said to be doubtful. 5. Whether the statements of the prosecution witnesses could be discarded on the ground of their being interested witnesses. 6. Whether the acquittal of one of the accused led to the inference that the prosecution version against the appellant was also doubtful.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The prosecution had succeeded in proving the motive for the crime, as there was a quarrel between the appellant and the deceased's brother regarding encroachment of land. 2. There was a consistent version given by the prosecution witnesses, as they all stated that the appellant had fired at the deceased and injured his brother. 3. The medical evidence fully supported the prosecution version, as the injuries sustained by the deceased and his brother were consistent with being caused by a firearm. 4. The first information report could not be said to be doubtful, as it gave a broad spectrum of the incident and failure to mention some minute details could not make it doubtful. 5. The statements of the prosecution witnesses could not be discarded on the ground of their being interested witnesses, as the law only required that their statements be considered with more care and caution. 6. The acquittal of one of the accused did not lead to the inference that the prosecution version against the appellant was also doubtful, as the case of the appellant could be clearly extricated from the case of the other accused.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed and the appellant was sentenced to serve out the sentence awarded to him by the learned Sessions Judge.