Back
2016 Supreme(All) 3834
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Ranjana Pandya, J.
M. Lal and Others - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and others - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2267 of 1982
Decided On : 11-05-2016
For the Appellants :- J.N. Verma, A.C. Tiwari, Mohd. Nausad Siddiqui, Rajesh Yadav and Yashpal, Advocates.
For the Respondents:- Ar Gupta, AGA.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for evidence of the working condition of recovered firearms, the necessity of an identification parade, and the implications of tainted investigation due to the subordinate status of the investigating officer to the informant.
Headnote:
I.P.C. - Criminal Law - Section 399, Section 402 - Arms Act, Section 25 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 399 and Section 402 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Section 25 of the Arms Act. It highlighted the requirement for evidence of working condition of recovered firearms, the necessity of an identification parade, and the implications of tainted investigation due to the subordinate status of the investigating officer to the informant. The court also referenced legal precedents to support its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the arrest and conviction of accused-appellants under Section 399 /402 I.P.C. and 25 of the Arms Act for planning dacoity and possession of arms. The appellants challenged the judgment and order of the lower court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the lower court had misled itself in reaching the conclusion of guilt for the accused-appellants. It highlighted the lack of evidence regarding the working condition of the recovered firearms, absence of an identification parade, and the tainted nature of the investigation due to the subordinate status of the investigating officer to the informant.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the recovery, lack of evidence for working condition of recovered firearms, absence of an identification parade, and the tainted nature of the investigation due to the subordinate status of the investigating officer to the informant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of evidence regarding the working condition of the recovered firearms, absence of an identification parade, and the tainted nature of the investigation due to the subordinate status of the investigating officer to the informant.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the accused-appellants were acquitted, and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence was set aside. The appellants were ordered to be released forthwith.
Mrs. Ranjana Pandya, J. –
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgement and order dated 4.9.1982, passed by Special Judge/Special Court, Kanpur Dehat in S.T. No. 35 of 1982 (State v. Munna and Another), under Section 399 /402 I.P.C. and 25 of the Arms Act, Police Station-Sajeti, District-Kanpur Dehat, whereby the accused-appellants were found guilty and sentenced to 7 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 399 I.P.C., 5 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 402 I.P.C. and 1 year rigorous imprisonment under Section 25 Arms Act.
2. The accused-appellant Nos. 1 and 2 namely Panna Lal and Munna Lal have died during pendency of the appeal, hence the appeal in regards to appellant Nos. 1 and 2 have abated.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 12.12.1981, Sri Om Prakash Jha, Station Officer, P.S. Sajeti, Kanpur Dehat got an information from an informer that a gang of dacoits would commit dacoity in the house of Raja Ram and would assemble in the temple situated in village Bibipur. He got this information entered in the General Diary (GD). Thereafter, S.O. along with S.I. Sri Ram Shankar Shukla and other Police Personnel proceeded from the police station at 10: 00 P.M. by jeep. They reached at the turning of Anoop-Pur and from there Sub Inspector Sri Mahadeo, with two constables joined the party. From there, they went to the culvert of village Bibipur and from there Vijay Kumar and Raj Narain Awasthi were sent to the village to call upon the witnesses. The S.O. conveyed the information given by the informer to all the party members. Thereafter, the witnesses Sheo Lal, Raj Sajiwan and Rajju Lal were brought by the aforesaid Constables. The search of all the public witnesses was made by the police personnel and they did not find any illicit arms. The S.O. divided the police party into three parts. He himself was the leader of the first party. Ram Shankar Sharma was the leader of the second party and Sri Mahadeo Singh was the leader of the third party. The S.O. sent Constables Prem Kumar and Brijesh Kumar to the house of Raja Ram for security purpose. After reaching the grove, where the temple of Usha Kant Baba was situated, the parties took their position. The first party sat towards the north of the temple, the second party sat towards the south and the third party sat towards the east of the temple. The informer had told that the dacoits would come from the western side, so, that side was left. After about 20 minutes, i.e. at about 12: 00 in the night, three miscreants came from the west and sat inside the temple. After a short time, four dacoits also came there and they started conversing that they should now go to the house of Raja Ram Seth to commit dacoity. They had sufficient arms. When they were about to proceed then the S.O. got satisfy by hearing the conversation that they were going to commit dacoity, then he fired V.L.P. and challenged the dacoits. Four of the dacoits namely Munna Lal, Panna Lal, Krishan and Gayacharan were arrested on the spot and the other three miscreants fled away. The S.O. conducted search. Consequently, Munna Lal was found having in his possession one country made pistol and two live cartridges, Panna Lal was found having in his possession one country made pistol and two live cartridges. Krishna and Gayacharan were also found having in their possession one country made pistol and two live cartridges. The recovered articles were sealed on the spot and recovery memo was written on the spot. The pieces of Beedi and matches were also taken into possession. The accused and the recovered articles were taken to the police station, where a report was lodged. A case under Section 399 /402 I.P.C. and 25 Arms Act was registered. Sri Mahmood Ali, S.I., commenced investigation on 13.13.1981. He went on the spot, prepared the site plan, recorded the statements of the witnesses and submitted the charge-sheet to the District Magistrate for the requisite sanction and after obtaining the sanction, he subm
