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

2005 Supreme(All) 127

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Imtiyaz Murtaza, Amar Saran
DAROGA SINGH ALIAS SHRI KRISHNA SINGH RAJESHWAR UPADHYAY AND PREM SINGH ALIAS PREM BAHADUR SINGH PINTOO SINGH
Versus
STATE OF U P
Decided On : 28 January 2005
Criminal Appeal Nos. 5587-5589, 2503, 2826, 2863, 3072 of 2004

Advocates:
AMIT MISHRA, ANUBHAV TRIVEDI, ARUN SRIVASTAVA, DILEEP KUMAR, G.S.Chaturvedi, IMRANULLAH, L.K.Dwivedi, M.L.Shukla, O.P.SINGH, R.S.PANDEY, RAJIV GUPTA, S.P.S.PANWAR, Satish Trivedi, V.P.Srivastava,

Headnote:

The Court upheld the conviction and sentences of the appellants for the murder of three individuals, rejecting their various arguments challenging the prosecution's case. The Court found that the prosecution had established its case beyond a reasonable doubt, relying on the testimonies of eyewitnesses, medical evidence, and other corroborating evidence. The Court also rejected the appellants' claims that the presence of the eyewitnesses at the scene of the crime was doubtful, that their testimonies were unreliable, and that the investigation was flawed.

Fact of the Case:

On April 4, 1999, Surya Narain Shukla, Devi Shanker Dubey, and Shesh Mani Rai were shot and killed in their car by a group of assailants. The incident occurred on a busy road in broad daylight, and several eyewitnesses were present. The police arrested several suspects, and the case went to trial.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the prosecution had established its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court relied on the testimonies of two eyewitnesses, who had identified the appellants as the assailants. The Court also considered the medical evidence, which confirmed that the deceased had died from gunshot wounds. Additionally, the Court found that the investigation was conducted properly and that there was no evidence of any foul play.

Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established its case beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the presence of the eyewitnesses at the scene of the crime was doubtful. 3. Whether the testimonies of the eyewitnesses were reliable. 4. Whether the investigation was flawed.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the prosecution had established its case beyond a reasonable doubt, relying on the testimonies of eyewitnesses, medical evidence, and other corroborating evidence. 2. The Court rejected the appellants' claims that the presence of the eyewitnesses at the scene of the crime was doubtful, finding that their testimonies were consistent and corroborated by other evidence. 3. The Court also rejected the appellants' claims that the testimonies of the eyewitnesses were unreliable, finding that they were credible and had no motive to lie. 4. The Court further rejected the appellants' claims that the investigation was flawed, finding that it was conducted properly and that there was no evidence of any foul play.

Final Decision: The Court upheld the conviction and sentences of the appellants for the murder of three individuals.

IMTIYAZ MURTAZA, J.

In these seven appeals the factual matrix relates to the same incident and the judgment impugned being the same, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. All the appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 24-4-2004 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/fast Track Court No. 1 Bhadohi in Session Trial No. 162 of 2000, State of U. P. v. Udai Bhan Singh alias Doctor Singh & Ors. convicting and sentencing the appellants under Section 302/149 I. P. C. for imprisonment of life and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, one month further R. I. , under Section 147 I. P. C. for three months R. I. and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine three months further R. I. and further convicting and sentencing the appellants under Section 148, I. P. C. for six months R. I. and fine of Rs. 1000. 00 in default of payment of fine 15 days further R. I. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 4-4-1999 one Rakesh Kumar Pandey alongwith his brother-in-law Surya Narain alias Vakil Shukla were coming from Aurai to Gopiganj in his personal Car No. WB 26a 7554. In the car Surya Narain alias Vakil Shukla, Devi Shanker Dubey, Rakesh Kumar Pandey and Prem Shanker Dubey were sitting and Shesh Mani was driving the car. At about 3 p. m. when they reached at Trimuhani of Mirzapur road in township Gopiganj on G. T. road, accused Udai Bhan Singh, Tehsildar Singh, Akbal Bahadur alias Atkoti Singh, Prem Singh, Dhunni Singh, Munni Singh, Daroga Singh, Rajeshwar Upadhyay, Pintoo Singh and two other persons who were armed with latest weapons started firing. On account of this, his brother-in-law Surya Narain alias Vakil Shukla, Devi Shanker Dubey and car driver Shesh Mani died on the spot. He and Prem Shanker Dubey who were sitting on the back seat of the car came out of the car and received injuries also. Licensed Rifle of Prem Shanker Dubey was left in the car, which was taken away by one of the assailants. The occurrence was witnessed by Shiv Prasad @ Dangar Tiwari, Mukund Lal, Ram Dutt Mishra and other persons. Shopkeepers started running away after closing their shutters. It is further stated that there was enmity between Surya Narain alias Vakil Shukla and Udai Bhan Singh with regard to some contract work. The report was lodged at 3. 45 p. m. by one Rakesh Kumar Pandey at police station Gopiganj and the distance of police station from the place of occurrence is one km. Uma Shanker Pandey, Head Constable prepared the chik F. I. R. (Ext. Ka-2) and entered it in the G. D. (Ext. Ka-3 ). S. I. Vidya Prakash Misra started investigation. He reached at the place of occurrence and recorded the statement of informant Rakesh Kumar Pandey. S. I. Rashid Ahmad prepared the inquest report of Surya Narain alias Vakil Shukla, Devi Shanker Dubey and Shesh Mani on his dictation. Dead-bodies were sent for the most-mortem examinations. He prepared the site-plan (Ext. Ka-25) and collected blood stained and plain earth from the place of occurrence, broken pieces of glass of car, a piece of Raxine, blood stained shoes, empty cartridges, one Rifle and 9 mm Pistol of deceased Surya Narain Shukla and prepared its recovery memos (Ext. Ka-26 to Ka-32 ). The dead-bodies were sent for the post-mortem examination through constables Devi Prasad Pandey and Prabhu Nath Yadav. Post- mortem of the deceased Devi Shanker Dubey was conducted by Dr. Radhey Raman, Medical Officer, Maharaj Chet Singh Hospital, Gyanpur 4-4-1999 at about 11. 55 p. m. He found following ante-mortem injuries on the dead-body of the deceased Devi Shanker Dubey:

(1) Fire-arm wound of entry charring and tattooing of size 2. 00 cm x 1. 00 cm. on left side of chest just below the mid part of left cavicle. Left side clavicle fractured with same wound of exit.

(2) Fire-arm wound of entry with charring and tattooing around of size 1. 00 cm. x 1. 00 cm. on right supra clavicular region 4. 00 cm. medial

















































































































































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