Back
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Nirmal Yadav, Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ.
Bhuwan Singh Latwal -Appellant
Versus
State of Uttaranchal -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 2001
Decided On : 3-3-2011
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Section 302 IPC and Section 394 IPC - Section 302, Section 394, Section 411 IPC - The court discussed the evidence of last seen, recovery of the weapon, and blood group matching from forensic reports. The court emphasized the need for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt in a case of circumstantial evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Narayan Singh and under Section 394 IPC for robbery. The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including the evidence of last seen, recovery of the weapon, and blood group matching from forensic reports.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed the crime. The court highlighted contradictions in witness statements and the improbability of the prosecution's case, particularly in a case of circumstantial evidence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of witness statements, the recovery of evidence, and the prosecution's ability to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a case of circumstantial evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the prosecution to establish a chain of evidence leading to the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in cases relying on circumstantial evidence.
Final Decision: The appeal of the accused/appellant Bhuwan Singh was allowed, and the conviction and sentence recorded against him under Sections 302 and 394 IPC were set aside. The appellant was not required to surrender, and his bail bonds were cancelled.
This Criminal Appeal arises out of an order of the trial court dated 25.1.2001 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 1994, whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh has convicted and Sentenced appellant Bhuwan Singh under Section 302 IPC for life imprisonment and simple imprisonment of one and a half years under Section 394 IPC.
Brief case of the prosecution before the trial court was as under :
An FIR was lodged on 7.3.1994 at about 10 A.M. by informant Sri Trilok Singh Karki, who is a Junior Engineer in the Electricity Department District Pithoragarh stating that one Nizamuddin, who is an employee of his department has seen the body of one Narayan Singh (who is also an employee of the Electricity Department), which is lying near Animal Hospital, Khetikhan, (in Pithoragarh). Nizamuddin thereafter found that there are injuries on the head of Narayan Singh and that he is unconscious. Thereafter he was brought and admitted for treatment at Lohaghat Primary Health Centre. The informant further states that on the basis of this information given by Nizamuddin, he is lodging the police case so that necessary proceedings be initiated by the police. On the basis of said information, a check report (Exhibit Ka 2) was prepared and a criminal case being Criminal Case No. 50 of 1994 was registered under Section 307 IPC. It must be stated here that since the condition of Sri Narayan Singh was critical, he was referred to hospital at Bareilly on 7.3.1994 itself, but on way to Bareilly Hospital, he succumbed to his injuries. This development was again reported by the informant to the police on 8.3.1994 and thereafter the case was converted from Section 307 IPC to that of Section 302 IPC. This has also come in the statement of P.W. 3 Jagdish Chandra, Head Constable who was posted at Police Station Lohaghat and has stated that on the report of the informant at 10 A.M. on 7.3.1994 Case Crime No. 50 of 1994 was registered under Section 307 IPC, however when the informant reported that Narayan Singh succumbed to his injuries thereafter on 1.30 P.M. on 8.3.1994 the case was converted from 307 IPC to that of 302 IPC and it was so noted in the General Diary.
The investigation in this matter was done by P.W. 9 Sri Anand Singh Gusain (Sub Inspector), who submitted the chargesheet under Sections 302, 394 & 411 IPC. The matter was subsequently committed for trial by Sessions Court. Thereafter the learned Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh vide order dated 16.6.1994 formally charged the accused under Sections 302 and 394 IPC. The precise order of the learned Sessions Judge dated 16.6.1994 was as follows :-
“I, M.A. Khan, Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, hereby charge you accused Bhuwan Singh as follows :
Firstly that you on 6th day of March, 1994 at about 6.15 p.m. near Animal Hospital, Khetikhan, P.S. Lohaghat, Distt. Pithoragarh, inflicted injuries on Narain Singh as a result of which he died at Khatima sometime in the night of 7/8-3-1993 on way to Bareilly Hospital, did commit murder by intentionally causing the death of Narain Singh and thereby comitted an offence punishable u/s 302, I.P.C. and within the cognizance of this Court of Session.
Secondly, that you on the aforesaid date, time and place you voluntarily caused hurt to Narain Singh in committing robbery and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 394 I.P.C. and within the cognizance of this Court of Sessions.
And I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the aforesaid charges.
Charges read over and explained to the accused in Hindi who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.”
As per the case of the prosecution, during investigation, it was found out that accused Bhuwan Singh i.e. the present appellant was the one who had killed deceased Narayan Singh, particularly from the statements given by P.W. 6 Bhagwan Singh and P.W. 8 Jagdish Chandra. The appellant was subsequently arrested by the police from “Bhingrara Tiraha” on 9.3.1994. On hi
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
