Back
2006 Supreme(All) 242
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Imtiyaz Murtaza and Amar Saran, JJ.
Badri Singh, Ram Autar Singh, Sultan Singh, Suraj Pal Singh, Brij Bhushan
Versus
State of U.P.
CRIMINAL APPEAL 524 of 1982
Decided On : 25 January 2006
Criminal Appeal 524 Of 1982
P.K.SINGH, R.K.SINGH, R.P.SINGH, S.S.Rathore, T.RATHORE, V.P.Srivastava,
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The judgment emphasizes the importance of clarity in presenting the sequence of events and the burden of proof on the prosecution.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under various sections of IPC - Section 302, Section 149, Section 148, Section 307, Section 324, Section 323 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the prosecution's case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Section 302 (punishment for murder), Section 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object), Section 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), Section 307 (attempt to murder), Section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), and Section 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt). The court analyzed the injuries sustained by the victims and the accused, the sequence of events, and the conflicting versions presented by the prosecution and the defense.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution's case was based on an incident where the accused, residents of village Sahbasi, allegedly attacked the residents of village Jaushan Khera, resulting in injuries and the death of Raja Ram. The defense presented a conflicting version, claiming that the accused were the victims of an attack by the residents of village Jaushan Khera.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. It noted the lack of clarity in the prosecution's version of the incident, the unexplained injuries sustained by the accused, and the conflicting accounts presented by the witnesses. As a result, the court acquitted the appellants of the charges.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the conflicting versions of the incident presented by the prosecution and the defense, the injuries sustained by the victims and the accused, and the lack of clarity in the sequence of events.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of clarity in the prosecution's case, the unexplained injuries sustained by the accused, and the conflicting accounts presented by the witnesses. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, acquitted the appellants of the charges, and cancelled their bail bonds.
( 1 ) THIS criminal appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated 26. 2. 1982 passed by the XII Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur Mahanagar in Sessions Trial No. 123 of 1981 whereby the learned Judge convicted the appellants Badri Singh and Sultan Singh to imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, two years RI under Section 148 IPC, seven years RI under Section 307 IPC, three years RI under Section 324 IPC, two years ri under Section 324 read with Section 149 IPC and one year RI under Section 323 read with section 149 IPC. The learned Judge also convicted appellants Brij Bhushan alias Nasail and satya Narain to imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 147 IPC, five years ri under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC, two years RI under Section 324 read with section 149 IPC and one year RI under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC, All the sentences were to run concurrently.
( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution as mentioned in the FIR was that on 7. 7. 1978 at about 8. 30 P. M. , the informant Daya Ram was taking his meal in his house. His brother Ram Prakash and his father Raja Ram were lying near their door, where a lantern was burning. At that time his co-villagers Panda alias Sheo Nararin and his brother Laxmi Narain came running towards his house and entered it. They disclosed that persons from village Sahbasi had attacked. Thereafter daya Ram came out of his house. He saw Badri Singh armed with spear, Sultan Singh armed with Pharsa, Gatai Singh, his son Brij Bhushan Singh alias Nasail, Satya Narain and three other persons armed with lathies present at his door. These persons started abusing him and asked him to produce Panda alias Sheo Narain from his house. When the informant Daya Ram, his father raja Ram and brother Ram Prakash asked them to desist from abusing, then an exhortation was given by Gatai Singh to beat the informant and others who tried to act as great helpers thereupon the accused persons launched an attack with the weapons wielded by them. On. the alarm, the mother of the informant Smt Durji and Kalloos mother Smt. Sheo Rani, his co-villagers Baldoo and Tilloo also arrived there, and witnessed the incident. The assailants ran away after committing Marpeet. The informant and others also plied lathies in their self defence. Daya Rams mother Smt. Durji, Kaloos mother Smt She Rani, Daya Ram and his brother received injuries with lathies, spear and Pharsa. His father Raja Ram became unconscious as a result of the injuries received.
( 3 ) THEREAFTER the informant lodged an oral report at police station Maharajpur which was at a distance of nine miles on 8. 7. 1978 at 1. 00 A. M. On the basis of the oral report, a case was registered against the appellants under Sections 147/148/324/308 IPC. After information was received that Raja Ram, who was being brought on a bullock cart along with the injured brother of Daya Ram, had died on the way, the case was converted to one under Section 304 IPC.
( 4 ) INQUEST was conducted on the body of Raja Ram, by SI Hariharnath Awasthi, P. W. 4 on 8. 7. 1978 at 10. 30 A. M at the police station. Thereafter the dead body was sent for post mortem, through Constable Dev Singh and Chaukidar Jhabbulal. Post mortem was conducted by Dr. S. P. Dubey, P. W. 6 on 9. 7. 1978 at 2. 15 P. M. at UHM Hospital, Kanpur, He found the following ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased Raja Ram:
1. Lacerated wound 6 cm x 1 cm x brain cavity deep on right parietal region, 11 cm above right ear vertical. There was depressed commuted fracture of frontal and parietal bones under the injury. 2. Contusion 18 cm x 6 cm on the right parietal region with commuted fracture of parietal bone underneath, 3. There was blueness around the right eye. 4. Incised would 1-1/4 cm x 1/2 cm x skull deep on right frontal region 9 cm above bridge of nose.
( 5 ) CONTUSION 14 cm x 7 cm on front of chest upper part and lower part of neck front.
( 6 )
