Back
2019 Supreme(All) 563
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD BENCH AT LUCKNOW
Ritu Raj Awasthi, Virendra Kumar, JJ.
Ram Phool @ Rajjan - Appellant
Vs.
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 184 of 2004
Decided On : 02-05-2019
S.K. Tewari, Adv., Ajmal Khan, Adv., Raj Bax Singh, Adv., Sushil Kumar Singh, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's reliance on the reliability and credibility of the evidence presented by the prosecution, as well as the appellant's lack of defense evidence or plea of alibi.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. - Section 384, 385, 386 Cr.P.C. - Summary Dismissal of Appeal - Procedure for Hearing Appeals - Power of the Appellate Court - Expositions of Law by Hon'ble Supreme Court and Rajasthan High Court
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Ram Phool @ Rajjan, was convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. for the murder of his ex-wife, Smt. Savitri Devi. The prosecution's case was based on the written report submitted by the complainant, Kanhaiya Lal, and the evidence of witnesses, including the medical examination reports of the deceased. The appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine. The appellant, through his counsel, informed the court that he did not want to press the appeal on merits.
Finding of the Court:
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence of the appellant, upholding the impugned judgment and order dated 17.01.2004. The court found the evidence presented by the prosecution to be reliable, trustworthy, credible, natural, and acceptable. The court also noted that the appellant did not present any defense evidence or plea of alibi. The court dismissed the appeal, and the appellant was released from jail after remission of his sentence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. for the murder of his ex-wife, Smt. Savitri Devi, and the subsequent appeal by the appellant, who expressed his unwillingness to press the appeal on merits.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the reliability and credibility of the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the written report, witness testimonies, and medical examination reports. The court also considered the appellant's lack of defense evidence or plea of alibi. The court affirmed the conviction and sentence of the appellant, ultimately dismissing the appeal.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant were affirmed. The appellant was released from jail after remission of his sentence.
1. Heard Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for appellant as well as Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This criminal appeal has been preferred assailing the impugned judgment and order dated 17.01.2004 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Rai Bareli in Session Trial No. 166 of 2002, arising out of Case Crime No. 192 of 2001, Police Station Mohanganj, District Rai Bareli, convicting and sentencing the appellant, Ram Phool @ Rajjan under Section 302 I.P.C. for imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.3,000/- has been imposed with default stipulation to undergo additional imprisonment for six months.
3. Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for appellant, on the basis of instructions received by him from his client, informed that appellant, Ram Phool @ Rajjan, has been released from jail as remission has been granted to his sentence.
4. Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for appellant makes a statement at the Bar that he has instructions to state that appellant does not want to press the appeal on merits and it may be dismissed as not pressed.
5. As per the prosecution version, the complainant Kanhaiya Lal, S/o Machal Pasi, submitted written report (Ex.Ka.-1) dated 27.12.2001 at the Police Station Mohanganj, District Raibareli. On the basis of written report of the complainant, Check F.I.R. (Ex.Ka.-3) and G.D. (Ex.Ka.-4) were prepared. Crime No. 192 of 2001 under Section 302 I.P.C. was registered on 27.12.2001 at 19:35 hours at the aforesaid police station. The complainant has also lodged N.C.R. No. 181 (Ex.Ka.-5), under Section 323, 504 I.P.C. on 26.12.2001 against the appellant and co-accused Matadeen, Baran and Smt. Rajpati. G.D. (Ex.Ka.-16) was prepared in this regard. Smt. Savitri Devi, wife of Kanhaiya Lal, complainant, was medically examined on 26.12.2001 at 3:30 p.m. and her injury report (Ex.Ka.-7) was prepared by the concerned doctor.
6. The complainant has narrated in N.C.R. (Ex.Ka.-5) that appellant along with Matadeen, Baran and Smt. Rajpati, co-accused, assaulted the victim, Smt. Savitri Devi. She was ex-wife of the appellant Ramphool @ Rajjan, who often beaten her up and they got separated one year ago. Smt. Savitri Devi, victim, resided with the appellant for six years after her marriage. The parents of the victim, Smt. Savitri Devi arranged her second marriage with the complainant, Kanhaiya Lal five years ago. The appellant along with the co-accused persons visited the house of complainant on 26.12.2001 and asked Smt. Savitri Devi to return the alleged articles. She told him that she had been separated on the basis of compromise and all the articles of appellant were returned by her. The appellant and his associates assaulted her due to this reason. When she raised alarm, the accused persons fled away.
7. The Investigating Officer prepared inquest report (Ex.Ka.-9) of the deceased, Smt. Savitri Devi and sent her dead body for autopsy. Her postmortem report (Ex.Ka.-2) was prepared. The Investigating Officer recorded statements of witnesses, collected the rope, which was used by the appellant in the crime and prepared recovery memo (Ex.Ka.-14). He inspected the place of occurrence and prepared site plan (Ex.Ka.-8). After concluding the investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet against the appellant.
8. The Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raibareli committed this case to the Court of Sessions on 19.03.2002.
9. The learned trial court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Raibareli framed charges against the appellant on 05.07.2002 for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
10. The learned trial court recorded statements of witnesses, P.W.1-Kanhaiya Lal, complainant; P.W.2-Dr. R. K. Verma; P.W.3-Head Constable Ram Kumar Verma; P.W.4-Smt. Kewla, wife of Ram Baran; P.W.5-Dr. N. K. Kanaujiya and P.W.6-S.I., Shri Shyam Sunder Grover.
These witnesses proved the aforesaid
