SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(All) 1394

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S.K.Agarwal, V.S.Bajpai
Jagatpal
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh
CRIMINAL APPEAL 1796 of 1981
Decided On : 11 August 2004
Criminal Appeal 1796 Of 1981

Advocates Appeared:
A.D.Giri, APUL MISHRA, G.S.Chaturvedi, K.D.TIWARI, P.N.MISHRA, R.C.UPADHYA, R.K.Pandey, R.P.SINGH,

The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of credible evidence, including eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence, in establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

Section 302 IPC - Conviction of appellants under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 302, Section 149, Section 148, Section 201, Section 324 IPC - The court discussed the evidence and arguments presented by the prosecution and the defense, and ultimately acquitted the appellants based on the lack of credible eyewitness testimony, doubts about the time of occurrence, and unreliable ballistic evidence.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted under various sections of the Indian Penal Code for their involvement in a murder case. The incident allegedly took place in a village, and the prosecution relied on the testimony of eyewitnesses, including the wife of the deceased, and other circumstantial evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the testimony of eyewitnesses, was not credible. The court raised doubts about the time of occurrence, the participation of unknown persons, and the reliability of ballistic evidence. As a result, the court acquitted the appellants and set aside their convictions and sentences.

Issues: The key issues in the case included the credibility of eyewitness testimony, the timing of the occurrence, the participation of unknown persons, and the reliability of ballistic evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of credible eyewitness testimony, doubts about the time of occurrence, and unreliable ballistic evidence. These factors led the court to conclude that the appellants should be acquitted.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the convictions and sentences of the appellants, and acquitted them. The appellants were not required to surrender, and their bail bonds were canceled.

S. K. AGARWAL, J.

( 1 ) THE appellants Jagatpal, Munna alias Avadh Behari, Kallu alias Ram Behari, Shyam Behari, Naresh and Swami Saran were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life by Sri L. S. Shukla, VI Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur, in S. T. No. 210 of 1979. Under Section 148 IPC they were sentenced to one years R. I. Under Section 201 IPC they were sentenced to three years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 100/- each and in default of payment of fine they were further to undergo six months R. I. Accused- appellant Swami Saran was further convicted under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to one year R. I. These sentences were to run concurrently.

( 2 ) AGGRIEVED by the above said conviction and consequent sentences the present appeal was preferred by these appellants.

( 3 ) THE occurrence in this case allegedly took place, according to the F. I. R. on 9-10-1978 at 1. 3-0 p. m. in the Gher of the deceased at his well in village Bada Tiwari Purka Derha, Majra Sar-kundi, P. S. Asodhar, District Fatehpur. Swami Saran, Jagatpal and Kallu alias Ram Behari along with two unknown persons armed with guns. Munna alias Avadh Behari armed with Gandasa, and Shyam Behari and Naresh were armed with axes at the relevant time. The deceased at the same time was present at his well to take a bath. A bucket and a Lota was there on the platform of the well. At the relevant time he was cleaning with mud his Tiffin career. Three of the accused persons, namely, Kallu alias Ram Behari, Jagatpal sons of Ram Kumar and one of the unknown jumped over the western wall of his Gher. They came to the well. Rest of the accused persons came to the well by entering from the main gate. Jagatpal exhorted by saying Aab Sale Bhag Kar Kanha Jaoge. Mere Bap Ko Mar Men Ma Ko Ran (widow) Kiya Hal. Tumhane Khunse Aapni Ma Ka Suhag Aaj Bhanunga. On the exhortation by Jagatpal, Kallu alias Ram Behari made the first fire on the deceased. Swami Saran made the second fire and there-after Jagatpal also fired on him. As a consequence of these shots the deceased fell to the ground and died. The dead body was dragged by Munna alias Avadh Behari. Naresh and Shyam Behari along with their unknown companions. When they were doing so, the wife of the deceased and other family members started raising alarm to attract the villagers. The exact statement was villagers please come. They are killing and dragging the dead body. When Smt. Lilawati tried to desist them from taking away the body of her husband, Swami Saran is said to have fired a shot on her leg. She also suffered injuries as a consequence and fell down near the well. The assailants also threw a challenge by saying that if any one came near them they will shoot them also. Due to fear none of these family members or those who arrived at the scene of occurrence, on hearing their alarm, dare to pursue these assailants. The witnesses, just to save themselves, stood behind the main door. The dead body was dragged upto the field of Dwarika and the informant. It was placed there on the middle of the Mend. Beheading took place here. It was done by Munna. The body was thereafter, it is alleged, was warpped in a cotton sheet and was carried to the riverbank. The written report was prepared by Sri Nath on the dictation of the informant. Kali Charan thereafter proceeded all along to the police station leaving the injured Lilawati at the house.

( 4 ) A case was registered at P. S. Asodhar at 4. 30 p. m. Its check report is Ext. Ka-1. Statement of Kali Charan allegedly was recorded at the police station. Thereafter the investigation was entrusted to P. W. 5 Balikaran Singh.

( 5 ) LILAWATI was medically examined on 10/10/1978 at 4. 00 pm. by P. W. 4 Dr. J. S. Roy. Since the dead body of Babu Ram was not traceable despite the net having been thrown into the river, no post-mortem report of his has come on the record.

( 6 ) THE prosecution examined Smt. Lilawati as P. W. 1. She is wife of the decea


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top