Back
2005 Supreme(All) 110
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Imtiyaz Murtaza and M. Chaudhary, JJ.
Dirpali, Sahjoo, Ghariba, Dirpali
Versus
State of U.P.
CRIMINAL APPEAL 737 of 1982
Decided On : 25 January 2005
Criminal Appeal 737 Of 1982
G.P.DIXIT,
The principle of 'falsus in uno falsus in omnibus' is not a mandatory rule of evidence and the court has the discretion to assess the credibility of witness testimony on a case-by-case basis.
Headnote:
MURDER - Criminal Law - Section 302 I. P. C. - The judgment discusses the testimonies of the eye witnesses, the medical evidence, and the principle of 'falsus in uno falsus in omnibus' in reaching the decision.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the murder of the appellant's cousin Sunder, with the appellants being convicted under Section 302 I. P. C. based on the testimonies of eye witnesses and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the testimonies of the eye witnesses credible and consistent with the medical evidence, rejecting the defense's challenge on the presence of witnesses and the alleged conflict between direct evidence and medical evidence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the eye witnesses, the timing of the occurrence, and the applicability of the 'falsus in uno falsus in omnibus' principle.
Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the conviction based on the credibility of the eye witnesses and the consistency with the medical evidence, rejecting the defense's challenge and applying the principle of 'falsus in uno falsus in omnibus'.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were directed to surrender to serve out the sentence.
( 1 ) THE present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 22. 3. 1982 passed by sessions Judge, Banda in Session Trial No. 326 of 1981 convicting the appellants the appellants dirpali and Gariba under Section 302 I. P. C. and sentenced to under go imprisonment for life.
( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case, mentioned in the F. I. R. lodged by Babuwa are tat about one year ago his cousin Sunder was murdered. He along with Chunkauna and Mudwa were made accused. The case is pending in the court. It is stated that on 4. 9. 1981 he, his brother Kishan Pal, sister-in-law Ram Dulari and father Mudwa were working in the field and after completing the work they were returning home via Ghosar minor. His father was ahead of them. At about 6. 00 p. M. his father reached near the field of Mahabir, Dirpali armed with Barchhi came and exhorted to kill him. His father ran and entered in the field of Mahabir and all the three appellants committed his murder. They raised an alarm. They were also threatened. Thereafter the accused persons ran away towards the eastern side. The dead body was lying in the field of Mahabir. He lodged the report on 4. 9. 1981 at 8. 30 P. M. His uncle Jhuriya and Chukidar were present near the dead body. The distance of the police station is only 8 kms.
( 3 ) AFTER registration of the case S. I. Khem Karan started investigation. He recorded the statement of the complainant at the police station. Thereafter he reached at the place of occurrence at 10. 00 p. M. He could not prepare the inquest report due to paucity of light. He recorded the statement of Ram Dulari and Kishan Pal. He prepared inquest memo on 5. 9. 1981 (Ext. Ka-11 ). He prepared the memo of photo lash (Ext. Ka-12), Chalan lash (Ext. Ka-13), letters (Ext. Ka-14 to ka-16 ). He dispatched the dead body for the post mortem through constable Ram Kumar and pyare Lal. He prepared the recovery memo of the cloths of the deceased (Ext. 1, 2 and 3 ). He also take blood stained earth and plain earth and prepared its recovery memo (Ext. Ka-10 ). He also prepared site plan (Ext. Ka-19 ). After conclusion of the investigation he submitted charge sheet (Ext. Ka-20 ). The post mortem of the deceased was conducted by Dr. D. S. Rana (Ext. Ka-2 ). He noted the following ante mortem injuries:
1. Lacerated wound on the left side of skull 1. 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep situated 4 cm above left ear. 2. Lacerated wound on the left side of skull 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep situated 7 cm above and behind left ear. 3. Lacerated wound on the left side of skull 1. 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep situated 2 cm behind injury No. 2.
( 4 ) LACERATED wound on the back of skull on the occipital region of skull 2 cm x 1 cm x bone deep 1 cm below the external occipital protuberance.
( 5 ) LACERATED wound on the left side of skull 2 cm x 1 cm x bone deep just adjacent to the middle to the back of left ear pinna. On exposing from injury 1 to 5 subcutanis haematoma with congestion menisgise seen with multiple fracture of left parietal and occipital bone with clotted blood at the ends of fractured bone seen. Brain softened and congested.
( 6 ) CONTUSION on the left side of face 8 cm x 6 cm just adjacent to the left ear. On exposing subeutainis haematoma with fracture of left side of mandible seen.
( 7 ) MULTIPLE contusions on the mid of the chest front on the body of the sternum 12 cm x 7 cm situated 4 cm supra sternal notch.
( 8 ) MULTIPLE contusions on the right side front of chest in an area 11 cm x 10 cm, 4 cm above and lateral to right nipple.
( 9 ) PUNCTURED wound on the left side of chest 3. 5 cm x 1 cm x chest cavity deep. Both margins are clean cut. Directed inwards, upwards and towards mid line, situated 4. 5 cm below and lateral to the right nipple. On exposing left side thorasi cavity perforated and left side strium of heart and left lung is perforated and clean cut. Thorasic cavity contain about 550 ml. Free and clotted blood.
( 10 ) PUNCTURED wound on the left s
