Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
P. S. Gupta, G. P. Mathur
BHARAT SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRASESH - Respondents
Criminal appeal 1503 Of 1978
Decided On : 03/08/1991
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - STANDARD OF PROOF - CHAIN OF EVIDENCE - INFERENCE OF GUILT - IDENTIFICATION PARADE - RECOVERY OF ARTICLES - RELIABILITY OF WITNESSES - INIMICAL WITNESSES - TIME AND PLACE OF INCIDENT - REASONABLE DOUBT - BENEFIT OF DOUBT.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that appellant Bharat Singh, Pradhan of Gaon Sabha Resoolpur, called deceased Panna Lal, a member of the Gram Samaj, to settle a dispute regarding Gram Samaj land. Panna Lal accompanied Bharat Singh along with his son Karan Singh. They did not return for about 2 1/2 hours, prompting Panna Lal's wife, Rajjo, to seek help from Fakira. Fakira, along with others, searched for Panna Lal and Karan Singh and found their dead bodies near the border of Gram Samaj land. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence to establish the case against the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the chain of circumstances necessary to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The court noted that the witnesses were highly inimical to the accused and that their testimony should be scrutinized with great care and caution. The court also found that the time and place of the incident, as stated by the prosecution, were highly improbable. Additionally, the court found that the recovery of articles, such as a bloodstained Tahmad, buttons, and a watch, could not be used as incriminating circumstances against the accused due to lack of proper identification procedures.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the testimony of the witnesses was reliable and credible. 3. Whether the time and place of the incident, as stated by the prosecution, were probable. 4. Whether the recovery of articles, such as a bloodstained Tahmad, buttons, and a watch, could be used as incriminating circumstances against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had failed to establish a chain of circumstances sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The court noted that the witnesses were highly inimical to the accused and that their testimony should be scrutinized with great care and caution. The court also found that the time and place of the incident, as stated by the prosecution, were highly improbable. 2. The court held that the testimony of the witnesses was not reliable and credible due to their animosity towards the accused. 3. The court held that the time and place of the incident, as stated by the prosecution, were highly improbable. 4. The court held that the recovery of articles, such as a bloodstained Tahmad, buttons, and a watch, could not be used as incriminating circumstances against the accused due to lack of proper identification procedures.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence passed against the accused, and discharged their bail bonds and sureties.
( 1 ) THIS appeal has been filed by nine accused against the judgment and order dated 23-5-1978 of 3rd Addi. Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr, passed in Sessions Trial No. 4 of 1976 by which the appellants were convicted under various sections including Section 302/149 I. P. C.
( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, is that appellant No. 1 Bharat Singh, was Pradhan of Gaon Sabha Resoolpur whereas the deceased Panna Lal was a member. The other deceased, Karan Singh, was the son of Panna Lal and was aged about ten years at the time of the incident. Panna Lal was Jatav and a Neta-type person and used to do pairavi on behalf of Gram Samaj in matters relating to Gram Samaj land. Panna Lal used to oppose Bharat Singh Pradhan and used to give applications against him. A case was fought between Panna Lal and Bharat Singh under Untouchability (Offences) Act in which Panna Lal had given evidence against Bharat Singh. It is alleged that at about 8 P. M. on 30-10-1975 accused Bharat Singh came to the house of Panna Lal in the village and told him that people were collecting and he should come for settling the dispute of Gram Samaj land. Panna Lal then accompanied Bharat Singh. He also asked his son Karan Singh to accompany him for the purpose of bringing flour from the flourmill. Thereafter both Panna Lal and Karan Singh accompanied Bharat Singh as he had given out that people had collected at his flour mill. Since Panna Lal and Karan Singh did not return for about 2 1/2 hours, Smt. Rajjo, wife of Panna Lal went to one Fakira and informed him that her husband and son had accompanied Bharat Singh but they had not returned. Thereafter Fakira, along with Ram Singh, Devi and Ganga Saran, proceeded in search of Panna Lal. They went to the house of Bharat Singh and also to his flour mill but no-one was found there. Thereafter they went to the flour mill of Ratna and Nain Singh but as no-one was present there, they proceeded towards Kalariwali Batia on the eastern side. When they reached near the border of Gram Samaj they heard some people talking. On this they proceeded further and Fakira flashed his torch and in its light they sawall the nine accused. The accused threw something and ran away. At that time accused Kunwar Pal was armed with a spear, Mathan with Gandasa. Rajbir with Knife and others with lathies. On proceeding further they saw the dead bodies of Panna Lal and Karan Singh. This incident took place at about 12/12. 30 in the night of 30-10-1975. Thereafter in the morning Fakira dictated a report of the occurrence to Kali Charan and a written First Information Report was lodged at P. S. Kakore, which is about four miles from the place of occurrence, at 8. 20 AM on 31-10-1975. Banwari Lal Gautam, S. O. of P. S. Kakore, immediately proceeded for the spot and took the dead bodies in his possession. He prepared inquest report and after conducting the necessary formalities despatched the dead bodies to Bulandshahr for postmortem examination. Thereafter he went to the tubewell of Mathan accused and recovered a blood-stained tahmad from a pit which is in front of the tubewell. He also inspected the Kotha and the flour mill and recovered a wreist watch and buttons from the said place. After completing investigation charge-sheet was submitted against all the nine accused appellants.
( 3 ) THE accused were tried in the Court of 3rd Addi. Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr. The prosecution in support of its case examined 11 witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge believed the prosecution case and convicted appellant Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 8, namely, Bharat Singh, Kiranpal, Har Prasad, Rajpal, Mahendra Singh and Batna, under sections 147, 201/511 and 302/149 IPC and sentenced each one of them to one year R. I. , three years R. I. and imprisonment for life respectively under each count. Appellant nos. 4, 5 and 19 namely Kunwar Pal, Mathan Singh and Regbery were convicted under Sections 148,201/511 and 302/149 IPC and were sentenced to two
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
