Back
1997 Supreme(All) 1065
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Virendra Saran, A.N.Gupta
BALAK RAM
Versus
STATE OF U P
Decided On : 12 September 1997
Criminal Appeal No. 228 of 1996
Nagendra Mohan,
In a criminal case, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Any discrepancies or contradictions in the prosecution case may be fatal to its case.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - SECTION 302, 302/34, IPC - FACTUAL DISCREPANCIES - DELAY IN FIR - UNRELIABLE WITNESSES - MEDICAL EVIDENCE CONTRADICTING EYE-WITNESS ACCOUNT - DOUBTFUL PROSECUTION CASE - APPELLANTS ACQUITTED.
Fact of the Case:
Appellants were convicted of murder under Sections 302 and 302/34 of the IPC. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was shot and killed by the appellants while he was returning from a sugarcane center on a tractor. The appellants claimed alibi and denied the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution case was full of discrepancies and contradictions. The FIR was lodged with an inordinate delay, and the time of the incident was doubtful. The eye-witness accounts were unreliable, and the medical evidence contradicted the eye-witness account. The court also found that the prosecution had failed to explain how the deceased's body and a blood-stained cycle were found on the northern side of the road when the incident allegedly took place on the southern side.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution case were fatal to its case. 3. Whether the medical evidence contradicted the eye-witness account.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution case were fatal to its case. The medical evidence also contradicted the eye-witness account. Therefore, the court acquitted the appellants.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the convictions and sentences of the appellants were set aside.
Balak Ram, Ram Kishan Awasthi and Onkar Nath alias Guddu have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 19-6-1996/20-6-1996 of Sri Jagdish Prasad, Spe cial/additional Sessions Judge, Kheri convicting and sentencing appellant Balak Ram under Section 302, IPC to imprison ment for life and appellants Ram Krishna and Onkar Nath alias Guddu under Sec tion 302/34, IPC to imprisonment for life.
2. The prosecution case is that on 8-2-1993 informant Brii Nandan son of Jang Bahadur Tewari of village Kairaha, P. S. Dhaurahra, district Kheri, his elder brother Gokul Nandan (deceased) in the company of co- villagers Ram Prakash and Keshav Ram were returning to their vil lage Karuwa in a tractor (USH 3067) after getting their sugarcane weighed at the cane center Basantpur and leaving the laden trolley at the centre. The tractor was being driven by Gokul Nandan. The younger brother Jagdish Nandan and Surrendra Kumar were coming behind the tractor on a motor-cycle. When the tractor was nearing trij unction known as khar-vahiya Karanha Tiraha at about 5. 30 p. m. appellants accompanied by an unknown person, who was on a bicycle, appeared and signalled the tractor to stop. As soon as Gokul Nandan stopped the tractor, the unknown person dragged Gokul Nandan and at the same time Ram Krishna and Onkar Nath alias Guddu exhorted that Gokul Nandan be done to death. Appel lant Balak Ram fired a shot with his country made pistol at the chest of Gokul Nandan who fell down seriously injured and died on the spot. On the alarm raised by the victims and hearing the sound of firing, villagers were attached to the spot. Thereupon the miscreants escaped by entering in the sugar-cane field towards north of the road. While escaping the miscreants were abusing and threatening the complainants party. This crime was committed in the back-ground of a dispute in respect of certain land. According to the prosecution case, a piece of land was pur chased by the informant etc. from Jagdish and one Saddiq had also made an agree ment to sell that very land to appellant Ram Krishna, but later on there was a compromise.
3. The FIR of the incident was lodged by Brij Nandan on 8-2-1993 at P. S. Dhaurahra in the same night at 11 p. m. According to chik FIR the distance of the Police Station from the spot is 4 kms. On the basis of the FIR a case was registered against the appellant and one unknown person and the investigation ensued. S. I. Muni Lal Chawdhary Pw 6 started inves tigation on 8-2-1993 itself. He rushed to the spot and interrogated the informant and after mid-night interrogated other witnesses, namely, Jagdish Nandan, Sur-rendra Kumar, Ram Prakash and Keshav Ram. In the morning the Investigating Of ficer prepared the inquest report and sent the body for post-mortem examination. He took blood-stained and plain earth from the spot and prepared site-plan. He also took into his possession one old used bicycle bearing frame No. P-25631 and prepared recovery memo. The Investigat ing Officer also took into his possession one empty cartridge of. 12 bore from the spot and prepared a memo of the same. The post-mortem examination on the body of the deceased Gokul Nandan was conducted by Dr. VK. Dikshit PW 7 on 9-2-1993. The doctor found that the deceased was 38 years of age and death had occurred about one day prior to the post mortem examination. The doctor noted the following injuries on the person of Gokul Nandan:
(i) Fire-arm wound of entry 2 cms. x 2 cms. x chest cavity deep on the upper past of chest and left side just below clavicle, Margins in verted and irregular. Blackening and tattooing present around the wound in an area of 3 cms. below and 1 cm. above the wound. The underly ing 1st, 2nd, 3rd ribs, alongwith the left clavicle were found fractured. The upper part of left pleura and lung and ascending orata were found lacerated. Left chest cavity contained 2 liters of fluid and clotted blood. One wad piece and 7 pellets were recovered f
