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

2016 Supreme(All) 2947

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Mukhtar Ahmad, JJ.
Waheed Khan - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 97 of 1984 With Criminal Appeal No. 68 of 1984
Decided On : 23-12-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Amar Saran, C.S. Saran, D.R.S.Chauhan, M.Islam
For the Respondent: Dga,S.I. Jafri
For the Petitioner: Amar Saran
For the Respondent: Dga,S.I. Jafri

The main legal principle established in the judgment is the application of vicarious liability under section 149 IPC, holding every member of an unlawful assembly responsible for the offence committed by any member of the assembly in furtherance of the common object.

Headnote:

Criminal Appeal - Conviction and Sentence - Sections 148, 302, 147, 149 IPC - Summary

Fact of the Case:

The case involved the conviction and sentencing of the appellants for their involvement in a criminal incident resulting in the death of Mukhtar Khan. The incident took place in a village in Bulandshahr, and the appellants were charged under sections 148, 302, 147, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of witnesses, including the nephew of the deceased, who claimed to be an eyewitness to the incident.

Finding of the Court:

The trial court found the appellants guilty based on the evidence presented by the prosecution, including eyewitness testimony and medical reports. The court held that the appellants were members of an unlawful assembly and were involved in the attack on the deceased, resulting in his death. The court rejected the appellants' arguments challenging the reliability of the witnesses and the timing of the first information report (FIR).

Issues: The key issues in the case included the reliability of the eyewitness testimony, the timing of the FIR, and the involvement of the appellants in the attack on the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles of vicarious liability under section 149 IPC, which holds every member of an unlawful assembly responsible for the offence committed by any member of the assembly in furtherance of the common object. The court also emphasized that the presence of the accused as part of an unlawful assembly is sufficient for conviction under section 149 IPC.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the criminal appeals, upheld the conviction and sentencing of the appellants, and ordered their custody. The court also recommended the consideration of remission of sentence for one of the appellants due to his advanced age.

JUDGMENT

Arvind K. Tripathi, J.

1. The present criminal appeal with criminal appeal no.68 of 1984 has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 7.1.1984 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr in S.T. No.462 of 1983 arising out of case crime no.55 of 1983, P.S. Ahamadgarh, District Bulandshahr convicting and sentencing the appellants Waheed Khan and Wahid Khan for two years rigorous imprisonment under section 148 IPC and life imprisonment under section 302 read with section 149 IPC, and convicting and sentencing the accused appellants Latafat, Farukh, Abid, Badiuzzama and Sabir under section 147 IPC for one and half years rigorous imprisonment and under section 302 IPC read with section 149 IPC for life imprisonment.

2. Being aggrieved against the impugned judgment the above noted two criminal appeals were preferred.

3. The present criminal appeal no.97 of 1984 was filed by Waheed Khan S/o Rashid Khan and Wahid Khan S/o Mohammad Ali connected with criminal appeal no.68 of 1984, which was preferred by Latafat, Farook, Abid, Badiuzzama and Sabir.

4. During pendency of appeal Wahid Khan S/o Mohammad Ali, Abid and Badiuzzama died hence appeal stood abated in respect of Wahid Khan S/o Mohammad Ali and Badiuzzama vide order dated 27.4.2016 and in respect of appellant Abid vide order dated 2.8.2016 passed by this Court. The date of occurrence is 6th May, 1983 at 8.00 A.M. in jungle of village Barari, P.S. Ahmadgarh, Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahar. The FIR was lodged by Ausaf Ali S/o Riyasat Ali, nephew of deceased Mukhtar Khan. The FIR was registered on 6.5.1983 at 9.30 A. M. at P.S. Ahmadgarh as case crime no.55 of 1983, undeer sections 147, 148, 307, 149 IPC. The distance from the place of incident to the police station was about 8 km. In the first information report nine accused were named including the seven appellants. After death case was converted under section 302 IPC. The accused Yunus S/o Ashiq and Sahid S/o Mohd. Ali, who were armed with katta were absconding hence seven above noted appellants faced the trial.

5. As per FIR version registered on written report of Ausaf Ali nephew of deceased Mukhtar Khan his uncle Mukhtar Khan went to jungle (agricultural field) to bring fodder at about 8.00 A.M. on 6th May, 1983 on which date report was lodged. As soon as he reached near the sugarcane field, Yunis S/o Ashiq Ali, Waheed Khan, Latafat, Farukh, Abid, Badiuzzama, Sabir and Wahid Khan S/o Mohammad Ali with common object surrounded him. Yunis, Waheed Khan, Wahid Khan and Sahid were having countrymade pistol and remaining accused were having lathi, ballam and farsa. The accused armed with fire arms, shot fire. After first shot hit to his uncle he ran to save him, thereafter, they surrounded and again shot fire from all side. The persons, who were working nearby the sugarcane field namely Sarafat, Nanha, Chhunnu, Sahadat and other villagers reached and saved him. The accused were having grudge and enmity due to village party-bandi and litigation and with intention to kill his uncle they attacked. The request was made to register the report and take legal action. By bullock-cart injured was taken to the police station and after registration of the case injured Mukhtar Khan was referred for the medical examination to Deebai hospital but he succumbed to his injuries on way to hospital. The body was brought back to the police station at about 10.40 A.M. by Constable. The inquest report was prepared by Sub Inspector Netrapal Singh. He also prepared Chalan Nash and Photo Nash, the letter was written to the C.M.O. for autopsy. The body was handed over in sealed cover with the cloth to Constable Iqramuddin and Lileyram. Initially case was registered under section 147, 148, 307 read with section 149 IPC, however, after death section 307 IPC was converted under section 302 IPC in the G.D. Entry no.14. The investigation was handed over to S.I. Prem Singh Nagar, who proceeded to the













































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