Back
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
M.C.Jain, Onkareshwar Bhatt
STATE OF U P
Versus
SURENDRA SINGH
Decided On : 19 September 2003
Government Appeal No. 2939 of 1981
Acquittal - Criminal Law - IPC Sections 302, 392, 120-B - The court discussed the motive assigned by the prosecution, the testimony of the eyewitness, and the subsequent conduct of the accused. It found the evidence to be fluid and unsatisfactory, leading to the conclusion that the accused could not be held guilty of the charged offenses.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the trial of two respondents, Surender Singh and Smt. Sanyogita, for charges under Sections 302 and 392 IPC, and Section 302 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC. The deceased, Devi Singh, had developed an illicit relationship with Sanyogita, leading to a night incident where he was murdered at his home.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the evidence produced at the trial to be fluid and unsatisfactory, leading to the conclusion that the accused respondents could not be held guilty of the charged offenses.
Issues: The issues revolved around the motive assigned by the prosecution, the testimony of the eyewitness, and the subsequent conduct of the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of logical motive, inconsistencies in the eyewitness testimony, and doubts regarding the subsequent conduct of the accused.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the case.
The State has come up in the appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 1-9-1981 recorded by Sri Ikramul Bari, the then IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Bijnor in Sessions Trial No. 412 of 1980. The two respondents, namely, Surender Singh and Smt. Sanyogita were tried before the Court below. The charges against Surender Singh were under Sections 302 and 392 IPC whereas Smt. Sanyogita faced trial under Section 302 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC.
2. The deceased was Devi Singh alias Bhullan Singh. He used to reside in village Shahpur Sukha, P. S. Kiratpur, District Shahjahanpur and was aged about 35 years. Sanyogita accused lived nearby. In between the house of deceased and that of Sanyogita, a ruined Ghair existed. Devi Singh deceased had developed illicit relation with Sanyogita and used to spend a lot of money on her Smt. Vidyawati PW 1 (wife of Devi Singh deceased) became aware of it and after great pursuation succeeded in stopping the visits of Devi Singh to Smt. Sanyogita. Sanyogita resented it she was deprived of the financial benefit. The incident took place in between the night of 4/5. 6 1980 at the house of deceased Devi Singh. Since about a month before the incident, the accused Surender Singh, resident of a nearby village Sarkara Kheri started visiting the house of Sanyogita. Devi Singh objected to his visits several times and two days before the incident, he had again objected to his visit to the house of Sanyogita. He had asked Sanyogita also not to indulge in such immoral activities. Sanyogita then abused Devi Singh and Surender Singh also left offering threats to Devi Singh. This was the earlier background allegedly leading to the incident.
3. In between the fateful night and time at about 11. 30 Oclock, deceased Devi Singh, his wife and their children were sleeping in their inner courtyard. Surender Singh scaled southern wall of the house Smt. Vidyawati PW 1 woke up by sound but before she could intervene, the accused Surender Singh gave two Tabal blows in the left side of the neck of Devi Singh who met an instantaneous death. Vidyawati in the meantime got up from her cot but she was held by accused Surender Singh by her hand and he tried to drag her to the room, saying that he would kill her too. He made her to part with one earring and removed the other one from her ear believing the same to be gold. Vidyawati raised alarm. Om Prakash PW 3, Jamraj Singh PW 4 and Jagat Singh PW 6 and many other persons were attracted by her alarm to the house of Devi Singh deceased. These three named witnesses saw accused Surender Singh running away from the house of Devi Singh. They also noticed him making some sign to Sanyogita who was present at her door. Vidyawati got written the FIR by Surender Singh son of Jagdeo Singh and sent it through him to the police station where as case was registered at 2. 15 a. m. on 5-6-1980. The distance of the police station from the place of occurrence was 2 kms. S. O. Dharamveer Singh Tyagi PW 7 was present at the police station when the case was registered. The investigation was taken up by him. He visited the spot and busied himself with the activities related to investigation. The dead body, after being sealed, was sent for post-mortem which was conducted on 6-6-1980 at 9 a. m. by Dr. B. B. Sharma PW 8.
4. Two incised wounds on left side of the neck, each measuring 10 cm x 2 cm x vertebra deep, 6 cm from left ear were found on the person of the deceased. The direction was horizontal. Both the injuries were parallel to each other and also parallel to left mandible. The trachea was incised and larynx carotid artery and left jugular vein were also cut. There was also fracture of third cervical vertebra. The death was the result of shock and haemorrhage produced by these injuries.
5. Apart from Doctor, Investigating Officer and other formal witnesses, the prosecution relied on the testimony of deceaseds wife Vidyawati PW 1 as eyewitness. On Prakash PW 3, Jamraj Singh PW 4 and Jag
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
