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) 3024

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Arvind Kumar Mishra-I, JJ.
Nafees - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1820 of 2003
Decided On : 04-02-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :- Mukhtar Alam
For the Respondent:- A.G.A.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of complying with Section 164 Cr.P.C., granting sufficient time for reflection, and ensuring the absence of police influence during the recording of the statement.

Headnote:

Confession - Criminal Appeal - Sections 364, 302, 201 I.P.C. - Summary of Acts and Sections: Sections 164 Cr.P.C., Section 302 I.P.C., Section 201 I.P.C. - The court discussed the reliability of extra judicial confessional statement, the compliance of Section 164 Cr.P.C., and the need for corroboration of confession statement before convicting the accused. The judgment highlighted the principles of Section 164 Cr.P.C. and emphasized the importance of granting sufficient time for reflection and ensuring the absence of police influence during the recording of the statement.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife and daughter based on alleged confessional statements and last seen evidence. The prosecution claimed that the appellant confessed to drowning his wife and daughter, but the medical report indicated poisoning as the cause of death. The appellant contested the confession, alleging police pressure and coercion.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the alleged confessional statement to be unreliable due to lack of compliance with Section 164 Cr.P.C. and absence of corroboration. It emphasized the need for granting sufficient time for reflection and ensuring the absence of police influence during the recording of the statement. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant was acquitted.

Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of the alleged confessional statement, compliance with Section 164 Cr.P.C., and the need for corroboration of confession statement before convicting the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The judgment emphasized the principles of Section 164 Cr.P.C., highlighting the importance of granting sufficient time for reflection and ensuring the absence of police influence during the recording of the statement. It also underscored the need for corroboration of confession statement before convicting the accused.

Final Decision: The impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court ordered the appellant's release from jail, subject to compliance with the provision of Section 437-A Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT

(Arvind K.Tripathi, J)

The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred assailing the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 5.4.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Bijnor in Sessions Trial No.454 of 2000 (State vs. Nafees) arising out of Case Crime No.271/2000 under sections 364,302 and 201 I.P.C. PS.Noorpur, District Bijnor convicting and sentencing the appellant for life imprisonment under section 302 I.P.C. and fine for a sum of Rs.5000/-, seven years' R.I. under section 201 I.P.C. with a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default, six months' further imprisonment. Further directed that all the sentences would run concurrently. However, he was acquitted under section 364 I.P.C. No appeal has been preferred against the acquittal under section 364 I.P.C.

2. Mr.Mukhtar Alam, learned Advocate, appeared for the appellant, Mr.Akhilesh Singh, Government Advocate and Mr.Chandrajit Yadav, learned A.G.A. appeared on behalf of the State.

3. The brief facts of this case, in view of the First Information Report lodged by Mohd.Tahseen, brother of deceased Famida alias Mem is that the informant Mohd.Tahseen was resident of Rasoolpur, village Nagla, PS.Chandpur, District Bijnor. His sister Fahmida alias Mem, aged about 28 years was married 11 years back with Nafees s/o Matloof, r/o Noorpur, Tehsil Chandpur, District Bijnor. On 1.9.2000 at about 2.00 P.M.(noon) Nafees, the appellant was going alongwith his sister Fahmida alias Mem, niece (bhanji) Angoori aged about five years and nephew (bhanja) aged about three years towards Khera and in the way Naseera s/o Basheer r/o Rasoolpur saw them on the same day at about 4.00 P.M. Nafees returned to his house and thereafter he left the village. However, his sister and niece did not return. They were not traceable, hence the request was made to lodge the Report to search his sister and niece and to take appropriate steps. The report was got written by scribe Zeemal Ahmad s/o Ridku Khan, r/o Rasoolpur Nagla, Bijnor and the same was lodged and registered at Police Station Noorpur on 6.9.2000 at 7.25 P.M.

4. While the informant and other family members and villagers were searching Fahmida alias Mem and her daughter Angoori, they met to the mother of the appellant Bhuri and his sister Sarofan in the village who informed that the appellant Nafees came at their residence and confessed that he killed his wife and daughter Angoori by pushing in Gogan River near Asgaripur. Thereafter they started searching the body of the deceased on 7.9.2000 and the allegation was made that Fahmida alias Mem and niece Angoori was drowned to death by his brother-in-law Nafees.

5. Further according to prosecution on 11.9.2005 dupatta of the deceased was recovered near sugarcane field under the sisam tree on pointing out of the appellant Nafees when he was apprehended. Thereafter on pointing out of appellant Nafees, the dead body of Fahmida was recovered at the other end of the river near agricultural field of one Chhotey Mistri. He also informed that he pushed his wife Fahmida alias Mem and daughter Angoori in the river and they were killed. The dead body was taken. Panchayatnama was prepared and the dead bodies were sent for postmortem examination.

6. The statement of Nafees was recorded who confessed his guilt. The arrest of Nafees was shown at about 11.00 A.M. on 11.9.2000 from triangle of Asgaripur, Moradabad. While he was in the police custody, he was produced next day i.e. on 12.9.2000 before the First Class Magistrate, Bijnor and his statement was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. in which he admitted his guilt that by pushing his wife Fahmida alias Mem he killed her. When her daughter Angoori saw, she also entered into the river and she was drowned to death. According to him the incident took place at 12.00 P.M. Thereafter he took his son and came at his house at about 3.30 P.M. Thereafter leaving his son at house, he left for Moradabad and when he was coming to surrender at the Po





































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