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

2019 Supreme(All) 223

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Sudhir Agarwal, Ram Krishna Gautam, JJ.
Kadir – Appellant
Vs.
State – Respondent
Jail Appeal No. 2679 of 2008, 1395 of 2008
Decided On : 21-02-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Ashwani Kumar Awasthi, Adv., Gauri Shanker Mishra, Adv., Gulab Chandra, Adv., Noor Mohammad, Adv., Rama Anuj Tripathi, Adv., Ravi Shanker Pathak, Adv., S. Sharma, Adv., Sanjeev Kumar Pandey, Adv.

The admissibility of information received from accused in custody under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the importance of corroborative evidence in proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

Jail Appeal No. 2679 of 2008 under Section 383 Cr.P.C. - Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 302, Section 34 IPC - The court discussed the admissibility of information received from accused in custody under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the importance of corroborative evidence in proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Fact of the Case:

The accused-appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for inflicting knife blows on the deceased, resulting in his death. The incident took place in the morning of 01.07.2005, and the deceased was declared dead upon admission to the hospital. The prosecution presented evidence of the written report, witness testimonies, and the postmortem report to establish the guilt of the accused-appellants.

Finding of the Court:

The Trial Court found the accused-appellants guilty based on the ocular testimony of witnesses, the discovery of the weapon of the crime, and other corroborative evidence. The Court also addressed the discrepancies between the medical and ocular evidence, emphasizing that minor inconsistencies do not discredit credible testimony.

Issues: The issues revolved around the admissibility of information received from accused in custody, the sufficiency of corroborative evidence, and the discrepancies between medical and ocular evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the admissibility of information received from accused in custody under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the importance of corroborative evidence in proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court also highlighted that minor inconsistencies in evidence do not discredit otherwise credible testimony.

Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC were maintained and confirmed.

JUDGMENT :

Sudhir Agarwal, J.

Jail Appeal No. 2679 of 2008 under Section 383 Cr.P.C. has been filed by accused-appellant, Kadir through Superintendent of Jail, Aligarh whereas Criminal Appeal No. 1395 of 2008 under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed by accused-appellant, Rahees. Both the appeals arise out of single judgment and order dated 19.02.2008, passed by Sri S.S. Lal, Additional Sessions Judge (Court No. 6), Aligarh in Sessions Trial No. 28 of 2006 relating to Case Crime No. 57 of 2005, P.S. Chandaus, District Aligarh whereby both accused-appellants have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they have to undergo further simple imprisonment of two years each.

2. Factual matrix of the case as evident from First Information Report (hereinafter referred to as "FIR") as well as material available on record is as follows.

3. A written report, Ex.Ka-1 dated 01.07.2005 was submitted in Police Station Chandaus, District Aligarh by Informant, PW-1, Babu Khan, alleging that in the morning of 01.07.2005, Informant along with his brother, Afsar @ Gatta was present at his home. At about 09:30 AM, accused-appellants Rahees and Kadir, residents of Qasba, Chandaus, came over there and called Informant's brother Afsar out of the house. When Informant saw outside house, he found all the three (two accused and one Informant's brother) were talking with each other at some distance from Informant's house. After a little, Informant heard alarm of his brother, Afsar, craving to save him, whereupon Informant and his brother Pappu @ Saheed rushed to the spot and witnessed, Rahees and Kadir inflicting knife blows to Afsar. Informant and Pappu then raised alarm whereupon, Nanhe and PW-2, Nunna also reached there. They exhorted accused-appellants whereupon they (accused-appellants), assuming injured Afsar to be dead, left him in a pool of blood and fled towards market, wielding knives and holding threats. Due to terror created by accused-appellants, shopkeepers started downing shutters of shops and market began to close. All passers-by and travelers started hue and cry, running hither and thither resulting in stampede and affecting public peace and law and order badly. Incident pertained to at about 10:00 AM. In order to save life of injured Afsar, he was taken to Medical College and at the time of admission in the hospital itself, Doctor declared him dead. Leaving dead body in the hospital, Informant went to police station to lodge report. On the basis of Written Report Ex.Ka-1 presented by Informant, PW-1, a Case Crime No. 57 of 2005 under Section 302 IPC was registered at P.S. Chandaus, District Aligarh by Constable Clerk Gopal Prasad. He prepared a Chik Report (Ex.Ka-2) and also made entry in General Diary as Report No. 20 at 01:30 PM on 01.07.2005, a copy of which is Ex.Ka-3.

4. After the case was registered, investigation was undertaken by PW-3, S.I. Veer Pal Singh who took copies of FIR, Chik Report, extract of case diary with him and recorded statement of scribe of FIR. He also recorded statement of PW-1, Babu Khan Informant. On pointing out of Informant, he visited spot and prepared site plan, Ex.Ka-4. The same day, he arrested accused-appellants who stated that they had been engaged as Driver and Helper on the truck along with deceased Afsar. Investigating Officer (hereinafter referred to as "I.O.") also recovered knives, Material Exhibits-1 and 2, on pointing out of accused-appellants from the place near bridge of Karbal River. Knives were kept in two separate clothes, properly sealed and thereafter, recovery memo, Ex.Ka-5 was prepared in the presence of witnesses, Yasin and Afzal. Blood stained clothes of Informant and witness Nunna were also sealed in a cloth and recovery memo, Ex.Ka-6 was prepared in respect thereof. I.O. PW-3 then after duly sealing the dead body and preparing relevant documents sent the same t













































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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