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

2008 Supreme(All) 63

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Prafulla C.Pant
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Versus
SOBAN SINGH
Decided On : 08 January 2008
Criminal Appeal No. 1354 of 2001

Advocates:
AMIT BHATT, K.N.JOSHI,

The prosecution must prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, and corroborating evidence is essential in cases based on circumstantial evidence.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure - Acquittal - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 378 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302, 34, 498-A - Section 35 of the U. P Reorganization Act, 2000

Fact of the Case:

The appeal was directed against the judgment and order of acquittal of the accused of the charge of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Finding of the Court:

The trial court found that none of the charges were proved against any of the accused, except the charge of Section 498-A of I. P. C. against one accused, who was convicted but released on probation due to old age. The court also noted the ante mortem injuries found on the deceased's body and the arguments regarding the cause of death.

Issues: The main issues revolved around the allegations of harassment for non-fulfillment of dowry, commission of murder, and the cause of death of the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of corroborating evidence and the need for the prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. It also considered the medical evidence and the absence of eyewitnesses to the alleged crimes.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's findings that the charges were not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the accused.

PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.

This appeal, preferred under Section 378 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr. P. C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 21-02-1987, passed in Sessions Trial No. 35 of 1985, by learned Ses sions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, whereby the accused (present respondents) are ac quitted of the charge of offences pun ishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Pe nal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I. PC. ). The leave to appeal was granted by the Allahabad High Court on 30-04-1992, as this appeal was initially filed there on 05-06-1987. This appeal is re ceived by transfer to this Court under Section 35 of the U. P Reorganization Act, 2000, for its disposal.

2. We heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire evidence on record.

3. The prosecution story in brief is that Budha Devi (deceased), daughter of Khaddu Singh (P. W. I), got married to Soban Singh (accused / respondent No. 1) resident of Village Sagwan Gaon, Patti Sarjula, District Tehri Garhwal, in the month of April 1984. Village of Khaddu Singh (parental village of the deceased) is Kanda of the same Patti and District, which is at a distance of some five kilometers (3 miles) from the village Sagwan Gaon. Accused / re spondents Bharat Singh, Bachan Singh and Chait Singh are brothers of Soban Singh (husband of the deceased), while accused / respondent Sauna Devi is mother of said accused. Accused / re spondent Chhaini Devi (wife of accused / respondent No. 2, Bhaiat Singh) and

accused / respondent Munni Devi (wife of accused / respondent No. 3, Chait Singh) are sisters-in-law of the deceased. According to the prosecution, accused / respondent Bharat Singh and his other members of the family i. e. the in-laws in the house of the deceased, were not happy with the dowry given in the mar riage and used to harass deceased Budha Devi. (It is pertinent to mention here that the incident in question relates to the year 1985 and Section 304-B of l. P. C. was inserted by Act No. 43 of 1986 w. e. f. 19-10-1986 ). It is alleged by the prosecution that Budha Devi in formed about the harassment by her husband and in-laws to her father P. W. 1 Khaddu Singh through some boy. On 12-08-1985, Budha Devi died of un natural death, of which according to the father of the deceased, no information was sent to him by Soban Singh or other members of his family. It is further al leged by the prosecution that the body of the deceased was disposed of on 13-08-1985 before Khaddu Singh or other family members from the parental side could reach village Sagwan Gaon. Lastly, though not mentioned in the first information report, but it is alleged by the prosecution that the accused / re spondents Soban Singh, Bharat Singh, Bachan Singh and Chait Singh made an extra judicial confession to P. W. I Khaddu Singh and other witnesses namely P. W. 3 Jagat Singh, P. W. 4 Gaina Singh and P. W. 5 Cyan Singh, village Pradhan of Village Kanda (who accom panied Khaddu Singh to village Sagwan Gaon) that they (accused) have commit ted a mistake by killing deceased Budha Devi and disposing of her body without informing her parents.

4. From the defence side, though it is admitted to the accused/respondents that Budha Devi got married to accused / respondents Soban Singh, but the al legations relating to cruelty for non fulfillment of demand of dowry or the allegation of commission of murder with common intention, are denied. Accord ing to the defence version. Budha Devi committed suicide and a first informa tion report (Ext. A- 2) was lodged on 12-08-1985. with the police outpost Bhaito Gisera (within the limits of police station Tehri ). Thereafter, inquest report of the dead body (Ext. A-7) was prepared by the police, where after on 13-08-1985. Doctor Y. S. Rana (P. W. 14) conducted the autopsy on the dead body. After au topsy. Doctor Rana prepared postmor tem examination report (Ext. A-12) a



















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top