Back
2016 Supreme(All) 3844
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Surendra Vikram Singh Rathore, Shashi Kant, JJ.
Ibrahim alias Pappu (Jail Appeal) - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2886 of 2010
Decided On : 10-06-2016
For the Appellant :- Jail Appeal (In Prison), (Amicus Curiae), Vaibhav Kalia, Advocate.
The reliability of a child witness's testimony and the corroboration of the appellant's statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with the witness's testimony were central to the judgment.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Murder - Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 374(2) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - [302 IPC] - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife by attacking her with a hammer. The prosecution's case was supported by the first informant, the son of the deceased, and a neighbor who testified to the appellant's threats and the circumstances of the incident. The appellant denied the charges, claiming false implication and lack of awareness during the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the evidence of the son to be reliable and credible, despite being a child witness. The court also noted that the appellant's statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. corroborated the son's testimony. The court held that the prosecution had successfully proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and confirmed the appellant's conviction and sentence for murder.
Issues: Reliability of child witness testimony, sufficiency of evidence, and applicability of Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the son's testimony, finding it to be reliable and credible, and noted that the appellant's statement corroborated the son's testimony. The court also held that the appellant's act was pre-planned, cruel, and took undue advantage, thus not falling under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, confirmed the appellant's conviction and sentence for murder, and directed the appellant to serve the sentence.
Shashi Kant, J. –
This Criminal Appeal (Jail) under Section 374(2) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C.') has been filed by Ibrahim alias Pappu-accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 06.10.2010, passed by learned Special Additional Sessions Judge, CBI (Ayodhya Prakaran), Lucknow in Sessions Trial No. 946 of 2008 - State v. Ibrahim alias Pappu, whereby the accused appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'I.P.C.') and has been sentenced for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5000/-. In default of payment of fine he was also directed to serve one year additional rigorous imprisonment.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that:
2.1 A first information report-Exhibit 'ka-2' had been lodged by the complainant/PW-1, Mohd. Saleem S/o Mohd. Habib (hereinafter referred as 'first informant') on 05.03.2008 at about 9.45 A.M. at Police Station-Wazirganj, District-Lucknow, stating therein that marriage of his daughter Rizwana Bano was solemnized about 11 years ago with accused-appellant Ibrahim alias Pappu R/o Lal Bagh, Lucknow and out of the said wedlock four children were born. His son-in-law-Ibrahim was living with his family as tenant in the house of Mohd. Siddique, situated at Mohalla-Sohan Nagar, Rakabganj, Lucknow. For the past 5 to 6 months he was not doing any work and was beating and threatening to his daughter. In the morning of 05.03.2008, Ibrahim alias Pappu killed his daughter, attacking her by 'hammer'. After receiving above information from PW-5, Abdul Aziz, he reached at spot and saw that dead body of his daughter was lying on 'Takhat'.
2.2 Above first information report was registered as Case Crime No. 87 of 2008 under Section 302 I.P.C. at Police Station-Wazirganj, District-Lucknow, an entry for registration of the case was made in the General Diary, a copy whereof is Exhibit 'ka-3'.
2.3 Investigation of the case was taken over by PW-7, SHO Vinod Singh Sirohi, who reached on the spot, recorded statement of the first informant and prepared site plan-Exhibit 'ka-9'. On the instructions of PW-7, PW-6 Sub Inspector Raj Bahadur Dwivedi, had prepared inquest report-Exhibit 'ka-5' and papers related to dead body i.e. challan nash, photo nash and sample seal (Exhibits - 'ka-6', 'ka-7' and 'ka-8' respectively). On the instructions of PW-7, Sub Inspector Indrajeet Singh Chauhan had recovered blood stained two pillow covers, one piece of bed sheet, took sample of plain and blood stained soil and recovered the hammer (material Exhibits - 'ka-10', 'ka-11' and 'ka-12' respectively).
2.4 The Investigating Officer PW-7, had also recorded statement of other witnesses, arrested the accused and recorded his statement, sent the recovered articles for chemical examination, obtained report of chemical examination and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet (Exhibit - 'ka-15') against the accused-appellant.
2.5 Postmortem on the body of deceased was done on 05.03.2008 at about 4.30 P.M. Following injuries were found on the body of deceased :
Ante Mortem Injuries
1. Lacerated wound 3cm X 2.5 cm, bone deep torn on right side of skull 7cm above right ear.
2. Lacerated wound 3cm X 3 cm, bone deep torn on right side of occipital region 6 cm back to right ear.
Cause of death as opined by the Doctor was coma caused due to anti mortem injuries on head and death took place about half day before.
2.6 In due course of time case was committed to the Court of Sessions and was registered as Sessions Trial No. 946 of 2008.
2.7 On 20.09.2008, charge under Section 302 I.P.C. was framed against the accused appellant. Appellant has denied the above charge and claimed for trial.
2.8 To prove its case the prosecution has examined first informant Mohd. Saleem-PW-1, Anus (son of appellant)-PW-2, Constable Ramasrey-PW-3, Dr. A.K. Srivastava-PW-4, Abdul Aziz-PW-5, Sub Inspector Raj Bahadur Sirohi-PW-6, SHO Vinod Kumar Sirohi-PW-7 in oral evidence and written report-Exhibit-'ka-1', Chik FIR-Ex
