Back
2017 Supreme(All) 1818
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : ARUN TANDON AND RAJUL BHARGAVA, JJ.
STATE OF U.P. ....Appellant
Versus
K.P. SINGH AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Government Appeal No. 3448 of 2002, decided on 18th December, 2017)
Counsel :
A.G.A. for the Appellant; Shailendra Kumar, Abhai Raj Singh, Amit Kumar Srivastava, Arun Kumar Srivastava and Harsh Vardhan Shastri for the Respondents.
Headnote:(Indian) Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302 read with Sections 120-B, 343 and 220—Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988—Sections 3(1)(D), 7 and 13(1)(D)—Evidence Act, 1872—Section 106—Custodial death—Proof and prosecution—Deceased set ablaze after pouring petrol in Police Station—Sustained 99% burns injuries—Trial Court disbelieved prosecution version for several material contradictions in version of witnesses produced by prosecution and acquitted accused-respondent No. 1, then SHO and also accused Constables—Challenge against—Entry made in General Diary found fabricated—Trial Court discarded erroneously testimony of independent witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.4, especially P.W.1 who has stated on oath that 6-7 days before 12.9.1994 he had seen deceased at Police Station—Fact that from where deceased got inflammable articles like kerosene oil to set him ablaze, has not at all been negated by any of accused-policemen—Preparation of records before shifting deceased to Hospital who according to record was admitted at 11 p.m. speaks volume of fabrication by respondent No. 1—Prosecution has successfully proved guilt of respondent No. 1—Respondent No. 1 held guilty for an offence punishable under Sections 302, 343, 220 IPC—However, State appeal against respondent Nos. 2 to 8 dismissed—Directions issued. [Paras 11 to 54]
Result; Appeal Allowed.
Hon’ble Rajul Bhargava, J.—Heard Sri Ali Murtaza, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P.-appellant and Sri Harsh Vardhan Shastri, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 7 as well as Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 6 and 8.
2. The instant Government appeal is directed against impugned judgement and order dated 8.5.2002 passed by Special Judge, (Prevention of Corruption Act) in Special Criminal Case No. 31 of 1994 (State v. K.P. Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 157-A of 1994, Police Station Kunwar Gaon, District Budaun whereby he acquitted accused-respondent No. 1, Krishna Pal Singh, the then Station House Officer, Police Station Kunwar Gaon,District Budaun under Section 7/13 (1) (D) of Prevention of Corruption Act and also acquitting, respondent No. 1, K.P.Singh and Constable Chamakar Singh, Constable Bhimsen, Constable Mazeed Ahmad, Constable Karan Singh, Constable Suresh Chandra, Constable Rajendra Singh and Constable Ram Saran under Sections 302 read with Section 120-B, 343, 220 I.P.C.
3. The prosecution version as narrated in the F.I.R. lodged by PW 5, Krishnapal Singh at Police Station Kunwar Gaon, District Budaun on 12.9.1994 at 3 p.m. in brief is that about eight days’ back at about 4 p.m. the police of Police Station Kunwar Gaon, District Budaun had taken away his brother,Deshraj Singh and detained him at the police station. At that time, the informant and others were working in fields. Station House Officer Incharge, Krishnapal Singh (hereinafter referred to as ‘SO’) alongwith other police personnel had taken his brother and did not disclose as to under what charge he was taken by them. Deshraj Singh was not challaned in any criminal case till 11.9.1994 and he was continuously beaten during these days. On 12.9.1994 in the morning SO and others badly thrashed Deshraj Singh and then set him on fire after pouring petrol on him on account of which Deshraj Singh got badly burnt. The policemen did not give any information and he was taken to the hospital. When first informant alongwith others were going to Budaun on 12.9.1994 in connection with some work and they saw that in the same bus, his brother in badly burnt condition was in the bus alongwith SO and others. On being inquired, Deshraj Singh has told him that SO and others have set him ablaze after pouring petrol. The deceased, Deshraj Singh succumbed to the burnt injuries in the hospital. On the application of first informant, PW 5, Superintendent of Police, Budaun directed for registration of F.I.R. Consequently, the F.I.R. was registered as Case Crime No. 157-A of 1994 under Sections 302/342 I.P.C. against the SO, K.P. Singh and others. On the orders of S.P. Budaun, the investigation was entrusted to CBCID. On 14.9.1994, the Investigating Officer inspected the spot i.e. premises of police station and prepared site-plan as Ext. Ka-5 by the prosecution. In the site-plan place ‘’A’ is shown as the room of Inspector and the Investigating Officer noted that blackening was present on the ceiling, walls and other places. Half burnt dress of a homeguard found hanging on the wall in the same room was taken in possession and the same was also sealed. Its recovery memo was also prepared. From place of incident, burnt skin, ashes of burnt clothes were also taken in possession, recovery memos whereof were prepared on 14.9.1994. During trial the genuineness of these recovery memos was admitted and its formal proof was dispensed with by the defence. On 14.9.1994 itself kerosene container lying outside the police office in the verandah was taken in possession in which two litres of kerosene was found which according to the police was used by the deceased, Deshraj Singh in committing suicide after pouring kerosene on himself. Its recovery memo was also prepared on 14.9.1994. The defence also admitted genuineness of it and its formal proof was dispensed with. We may record that the defence has admi
