Back
2014 Supreme(All) 2576
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Rakesh Tiwari, Kalimullah Khan, JJ.
State of U.P. - Appellant
Versus
Gulab Yadav & Others - Respondent
Government Appeal No. 1308 of 1984
Decided On : 20-02-2014
For the Appellant : Aga
For the Respondent: Sri N.N. Singh & Sri Ram Ker Singh
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove criminal cases beyond all reasonable doubts, emphasizing the importance of corroborative evidence and the credibility of witnesses.
Headnote:
Acquittal - Criminal Law - Section 307/34 IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 307/34 IPC - The court discussed the evidence and interpretation of Section 307/34 IPC, emphasizing the burden of proof and the requirement to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts. The court highlighted the importance of corroborative evidence and the credibility of witnesses in reaching the decision to uphold the acquittal of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an incident where the respondents-accused were acquitted of the offences under Sections 307/34 IPC, following an alleged revenge attack. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of witnesses and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts, highlighting discrepancies in witness testimony, lack of corroborative evidence, and contradictions in the medical evidence. The court also raised doubts about the presence and conduct of the witnesses at the time of the occurrence.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the credibility of witnesses, the sufficiency of evidence to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts, and the reliability of the prosecution's version of events.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of corroborative evidence, the credibility of witnesses, and the burden of proof in criminal cases. It highlighted the need for consistency and reliability in witness testimony and the requirement to establish the case beyond all reasonable doubts.
Final Decision: The court upheld the findings of the trial Court and dismissed the Government Appeal, affirming the acquittal of the respondents-accused.
Rakesh Tiwari, J.: -
Heard Ms. Usha Kiran, learned AGA for the appellant-State of U.P., Sri Ram Kher Singh, learned counsel for the respondents-accused and perused the record.
2. This government appeal is preferred challenging the validity and correctness of the impugned judgment and order dated 23.1.1984 passed by VI Addl. Sessions Judge, Azamgarh in S.T. No. 158 of 1980 (State Versus Gulab Yadav and others) by which respondents-accused Gulab Yadav son of Sriman, Tilakdhari son of Ganesh and Faujdar son of Bairagi, all residents of village Akbelpur Maraiya, P.S. Mehnagar, District Azamgarh were acquitted of the offences under Sections 307/34 IPC.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that .prior to this incident in the year 1976 a dacoity was committed at the house of respondent-accused Tilakdhari in which Sriman father of respondent-accused Gulab was shot dead by the dacoits. In that case, Ramchet father of first informant Ashok Kumar Yadav, his uncle Shamsher and Kedar were named. They were convicted by the trial Court in the year 1978 but in appeal the High Court acquitted them in the year 1979. The acquittal enraged the respondents-accused in the present case, hence with a view to avenge they on 18.2.1980 at about sun set are said to have committed the offence when Ashok Kumar along with his uncle Shamsher and one Awadhesh went across the river 'Taus' for easing in field and when all the three were sitting scatterly at some distance from each other. Accused Gulab Yadav armed with country made pistol, accused Tilakdhari and Faujdar armed with knives surrounded Shamsher. Accused Gulab fired a shot from the country made pistol on him which struck on his lower back side.Shamsher fell down due to the firearm injury. On hearing the gunshot and cry of Shamsher, Ashok Kumar, Awadesh, Ram dhari, Tribhuwan and others reached at the spot and saw accused Tilakdhari and Faujdar caused injuries on him with knives on his neck and head. Seeing them, all the assailants ran away towards western side after firing a shot with the country made pistol. First informant Ashok Kumar sent injured Shamsher with Ramdhari on a rickshaw to Sadar hospital, Azamgarh and he went to his house in Quasba Sidhari where he scribed a written report of the occurrence and lodged it at P.S. Kotwali, Azamgarh at 7.00 P.M. On the basis of written report, check report was scribed by Head Constable Surya Narain Singh. After making entry in the G.D. the FIR of the incident was registered at case crime no. 133 of 1980 under Section 307 IPC against aforesaid respondents-accused persons.
4. The investigation of the case was taken over by S.I. Sri M.N. Tiwari (PW-6) who went to the hospital and found the injured not in a position to give his statement. Dr. B. Das (PW-4), Medical Officer on duty, Sadar Hospital, Azamgarh found the condition of injured Shamsher precarious and dangerous, hence sent a message to the Magistrate for recording dying declaration of the patient. He also conducted the medical examination of injured Shamsher on 18.2.80 at 7.30 P.M. and found following injuries on his person.
1. Incised wound 2 cm. x 0.5 cm. x 0.2 cm. over dorsum of right hand edges are clean cut. Bleeding present.
2. Incised wound 4 cm. x 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. over back of neck edges are clean cut. Bleeding present.
3. Fire arm wound of entrance 4 cm. x 3 cm. over left gluteal region. No tattoing, no burning. Pellets not palpable. Bleeding present.
4. Incised wound 3 cm. x 0.5 cm. x 0.2 cm. over back in right side scapular region. Wound is not of such type. No surgical campysuwa.
5. Incised wound 1.5 cm. x 0.3 cm. x 0.2 cm. over back of right shoulder.
6. Abrasion 1 cm. x 0.5 cm. over back of right upper scapular region.
7. Abraded contusion 5 cm. x 2 cm. over right clancular region.
8. Abraded contusion 2 cm. 1 cm. over outer side of left shoulder.
In the opinion of the doctor, all the injuries are simple except injuries no. 1,2 & 3. He advised x-ray for injuries no. 1,3,4
