Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Mukerji and James, JJ.
STATE - Appellant
Versus
MURLI - Respondents
Criminal Govt. Appeal 361 Of 1953
Decided On : 10/19/1955
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - ACQUITTAL - APPEAL BY STATE - POWER OF HIGH COURT - CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH HIGH COURT CAN INTERFERE WITH ACQUITTAL - PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY PRIVY COUNCIL IN SHEO SWARUP V. EMPEROR, AIR 1934 PC 227 (A) - DISTINCTION BETWEEN ACCOMPLICE AND ORDINARY WITNESS - EVIDENCE OF ACCOMPLICE - HOW TO BE DEALT WITH - EVIDENCE ACT (1 OF 1872), SEC. 3 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE (V OF 1898), SECS. 337, 417, 418, 423.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased Ram Kali was done to death and the respondents were charged with her murder. The prosecution were able to call at the trial Imirti, the wife of Misri, to give direct testimony of the murder. The position of Imirti was more or less that of an accomplice in the case, so that her testimony could not be relied upon without adequate corroboration. There was a further difficulty in accepting Imirtis testimony without corroboration, because the defence case was that she deposed to in the manner, she did in order to get rid of her male relations so that she could be free to carry on with her intrigues, unhampered, with Kanchan Singh.
Finding of the Court:
The evidence of Imarti has been the subject of much controversy. The learned Sessions judge has found her as "not at all a reliable witness". His principal reason for this view seems to be that she was on intimate terms with the prosecution witness Kanchan Singh and was therefore to use the words of the learned Judge--"a woman of easy virtue, who may have no love for her men-folk, and may even wish to put them out of the way". There is no doubt some force in the contention that she has connection with Kanchan Singh, though it must be pointed out that according to the prosecution witness Chhote Dhobi the intimacy commenced subsequent to the present murder. Besides there is nothing whatsoever in the evidence to suggest that Imarti had ever tried to put her men-folk "out of the way". The learned trial Judge has further thought that there were certain contradictions in Imartis story and that she might have been tutored by Kanchan Singh since on the 13th May she travelled with him in the same ekka from the village to the police station. On the last point the learned Judge is manifestly wrong since there is unimpeachable evidence that in the same ekka her husband Misri also travelled, so that there could be no question of any outsider having a chance of coaching her into implicating her husband in the serious charge of murder. Finally the Sessions Judge has considered that the woman made her deposition under coercion from the police. This is based on the following passage in her cross examination before the Sessions Court: "i told the Subedar (i. e. Mumtaz Ali) and others that I would not depose against my husband. I had disclosed the fact because it was true, but I told them that I would not depose in Court. The sub-Inspector forced me to give evidence. He did not beat, torture or threaten me, but only orally compelled me to give evidence".
Issues: Whether the High Court can interfere with the acquittal of the accused by the trial court?
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court has the power to review at large the evidence upon which the order of acquittal was founded, and to reach the conclusion that upon that evidence the order of acquittal should be reversed. No limitation should be placed upon that power, unless it be found expressly stated in the Code. But in exercising the power conferred by the Code and before reaching its conclusions upon fact, the High Court should and will always give proper weight and consideration to such matters as (1) the views of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the witnesses; (2) the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, a presumption certainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial; (3) the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and (4) the slowness of an appellate Court in disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witnesses.
Final Decision: The appeal against the acquittal of Murli and Naththu is allowed and they are convicted of offences under Sections 302 and 392 read with Section 34, I. P. C. Murli is sentenced to death and Naththu to transportation for life. The appeal against the acquittal of Misri is dismissed.
( 1 ) IN this case I have had the advantage of reading the carefully prepared judgment of my learned brother James. I am in agreement with him that the State appeal should be allowed as against two of the respondents, namely Nathu and Murli.
( 2 ) I consider it unnecessary to go into the facts of this case in any detail, inasmuch as, all the facts have been set out in my learned brothers judgment. I shall, therefore, only briefly indicate the reasons that have impelled me to agree with the conclusions arrived at by my learned brother.
( 3 ) A young girl Ram Kali was done to death and the respondents were charged with her murder. The prosecution were able to call at the trial Imirti, the wife of Misri, to give direct testimony of the murder. The position of Imirti was more or less that of an accomplice in the case, so that her testimony could not be relied upon without adequate corroboration. There was a further difficulty in accepting Imirtis testimony without corroboration, because the defence case was that she deposed to in the manner, she did in order to get rid of her male relations so that she could be free to carry on with her intrigues, unhampered, with Kanchan Singh. Although I have been unable to accept the defence suggestion that Imirti had any such intentions or that Imirti deliberately perjured herself with the nefarious object of putting her husband and his male relations out of her way, yet I have taken this factor into account in order to caution myself further in accepting the testimony of Imirti without adequate corroboration. The corroboration which is available on the record to the testimony of Imirti is of a circumstantial character. I shall, therefore, refer to the circumstances which, in my judgment, lent adequate and ample corroboration to Imirtis testimony.
( 4 ) ON the admitted facts the following circumstances have emerged
(1) The deceased was called to the house of the accused by one of the accused, namely Nathu. (2) The deceased was last seen alive in the company of accused Nathu. (3) The murder of Ram Kali was committed in the house of the accused which was jointly owned and used by the accused. (4) The body of Ram Kali in two parts--head and trunk separated was recovered from a room of the house where the different parts were found buried in different corners of the room. (5) The ornaments of the deceased were recovered, some from the possession of Nathu and the rest from under the ground of one of the rooms of the accuseds house. (6) The discovery of the dismembered corpse of Ram Rali and her ornaments was made at the instance of at least one of the accused. (7) Nathu accused attempted to sell some of the ornaments of the deceased clandestinely. (8) None of the accused took any steps to give information of the crime to anyone, indeed, they did all that they could to obliterate material evidence of the crime.
( 5 ) THE facts which I have found established on the evidence are these:-
(1) That Murli was financially in embarrassed circumstances. (2) That Nathu made an extra-judicial confession before the villagers and in this confession he implicated himself, his father and his brother. The learned Judges opinion that Nathu did not implicate himself in his extra-judicial confession does not appear to me to be sound, for he discarded that portion of the prosecution ease on the sole ground that the fact of Nathu having implicated himself in the crime was not clearly set down in the first information report. The first information report in this case was made by Chote Lal, the father of the deceased girl Ram Kali, and any omission in that report of the fact that Nathu also implicated himself in the crime could not, in my opinion, be justly taken to disbelieve the direct testimony on this matter given by mumtaz Ali and Baldeo. The slight variation in the sequence of statements which were alleged to have been made by the accused before the villagers who were collected at Bharat Singhs chabutra co
AI
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
