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

2012 Supreme(All) 1413

[2012(7) ADJ 306 (DB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : SURENDRA SINGH AND ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL, JJ.
MATHURA PRASAD ....Appellant (In Jail)
Versus
STATE OF U.P. ....Opposite Party
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 5461 and 6472 of 2003, decided on 25th May, 2012)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Manish Joshi, Apul Misra, Apul Rai, K.K. Roy, S.K. Singh, S.N. Singh, Smt. Archana Singh, R.L. Verma and S.K. Vidyarthi for the Appellant; A.G.A. for the Opposite Party.

Headnote:(Indian) Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302/34 and 307—Evidence Act, 1872—Section 134—Arms Act, 1959—Section 25—Murder—Injured eye-witness—Motive—Conviction—Sustainability of—Appellants had strong motive—On account of election rivalry—Testimony of solitary injured witness is sufficient to prove guilt—If it is free from any blemish or suspicion—Evidence of hostile witness not to be completely discarded—It needs review corroboration from other evidence—Minor variance with medical evidence not of any consequence—In present case FIR not ante-timed—No material discrepancy in statement of prosecution witness—Non-production of independent witness not fatal—As injured is a competent witness—If he is not under influence or tutored—Presence of witness not doubtful—Medical evidence is not conclusive evidence—Conviction upheld. [Paras 19, 20, 22 to 28 and 30]

       Result; Appeals Dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Surendra Singh, J.—Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 23.10.2003 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. 1), Pilibhit in S.T. No. 553 of 2002 (State v. Mathura Prasad and others) convicting and sentencing the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for the life imprisonment with the fine of Rs. 10,000/- to each of the appellants and in default of payment of fine further one year’s rigorous imprisonment and under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC for ten years’ R.I. with the fine of Rs. 5000/- to each of the appellants and in default of payment of fine further six months additional imprisonment with further direction that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. Since both these appeals are connected to each other, hence they are being decided together with common judgment.

THE FACTS

3. Abbreviated back ground facts are that the deceased Haripal Verma, husband of the informant Smt. Krishna Devi, was the sitting Pradhan of Village Aamkheda, police station Barkheda, District Pilibhit. On 14.12.2001 at about 4.30 p.m. he went for marketing to Adhkata alongwith Ram Kumar son of Bihari Lal (P.W-2) and Heera Lal son of Bholey Ram (P.W-3), both resident of same village Aamkheda, on a motorcycle. In the evening at about 7.30 p.m. on return for their village, when they reached near the field of Chhatrapal son of Roshan Lal, on the eastern side of the road accused appellant No. 1 Mathura Prasad armed with banka, Jagdish Prasad, appellant No. 2 with countrymade pistol and one, unknown person having armed with lathi were seen standing, in the light of motor-cycle. It was alleged that motor-cycle was driven by Heera Lal (P.W-3), Ram Kumar (P.W-2) was pillion rider while the deceased Haripal Verma, Pradhan was seated between them. As they reached near to them unknown assailant gave a lathi blow to Heera Lal, on account of which the motor-cycle got disbalanced and had fallen in a ditch in the eastern side of the road. All the accused persons thereafter caught hold the deceased and started beating with lathi and banka. Both, Ram Kumar and the deceased, in order to save their lives, ran towards the eastern side. However, the deceased could not reach beyond the field of Nokhey Lal and he was surrounded by the assailants and was thereafter assassinated by firearm and banka. It was further alleged that at the same time Heera Lal son of Kadhey Ram alongwith Chhatrapal of the village have also arrived at the place of incident in another motorcycle and they have also witnessed the accused appellants lambasting the deceased in the source of light of the motor-cycle. Thereafter Heera Lal (injured) went to the house of the deceased and informed his wife Smt. Krishna Devi about the incident. On being informed, informant Smt. Krishna Devi (P.W-1) went to the police station Barkheda alongwith Heera Lal (P.W-3) after covering a distance of four and half kilometres where she lodged written FIR (Ex Ka-1) on the same day at about 9.45 pm, which she got scribed through one, Bhagwan Das.

4. Head Moharrir, Shyam Lal (P.W-6) registered the written report at crime No. 430 of 2001, under Sections 302/307 IPC, prepared the chik FIR (Ex Ka-2) and made relevant entry in G.D.

The investigation was entrusted to S.O., P.L. Vishwakarma (P.W-9), who recorded the statement of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C., copied chik FIR and G.D. entry and thereafter reaching on the spot, performed inquest on the dead body and got inquest memo (Ex Ka-22) and other relevant documents prepared. A chiththi majrubi was prepared and the injured, Heera Lal was sent to PHC, Barkheda, Pilibhit where he was medically examined. The dead body was dispatched for autopsy purposes. Thereafter I.O. conducted spot inspection and prepared site plan (Ex Ka-10), collected blood stained earth and plain earth and recovered an empty cartridge (Ex Ka-11 and Ex Ka-12). On 16.12.2001 I.O. arrested both the appellan





























































































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top