Back
2018 Supreme(All) 2332
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ANIL KUMAR, ANANT KUMAR, JJ.
Dashrath – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 75 of 2009
Decided on : 04-08-2018
For the Appellant : In person Counsel
Delay in lodging the F.I.R alone cannot discredit the prosecution's version, and the credibility of interested witnesses can be sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Headnote:
Delay in lodging F.I.R - Criminal Appeal - Section 302 I.P.C. - [1980 SCC (Cri) 985, (2013) 12 SCC 765] - The court examined the delay in lodging the F.I.R and found that the prosecution adequately explained the delay, and the trial court rightly considered this aspect. The delay alone cannot discredit the prosecution's version. The court cited case law to support the view that delay in lodging the F.I.R is not fatal to the case if there is a cogent and acceptable explanation for the delay.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Dashrath, filed a Criminal Appeal against his conviction and sentence under Section 302 I.P.C. for the murder of his uncle. The incident occurred when the deceased refused to release mortgaged land, leading to a confrontation and subsequent murder. The appellant denied the charges, claiming false implication due to a property dispute.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the prosecution's evidence, including the delay in lodging the F.I.R, the location of the occurrence, and the testimony of interested witnesses, to be credible. The court rejected the appellant's defense and upheld the trial court's decision, concluding that the prosecution had proven the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues: The issues revolved around the delay in lodging the F.I.R, the location of the occurrence, the credibility of interested witnesses, and the absence of independent witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that delay in lodging the F.I.R alone cannot discredit the prosecution's version and cited case law to support this principle. The court also highlighted the credibility of interested witnesses and the lack of necessity to examine independent witnesses when the existing evidence is reliable.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court concurred with the trial court's findings, upholding the appellant's conviction and sentence under Section 302 I.P.C.
JUDGMENT :
Anant Kumar, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the convict-appellant Dashrath from Central Prison, Bareilly against conviction and sentence dated 05.07.2008, passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Court No.6, Sitapur in Sessions Trial No. 848 of 2007, Case Crime No.164 of 2007, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur whereby the appellant Dashrath was held guilty of the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.5,000/-.
2. Brief facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that the complainant Pavan Kumar, S/o Jagan Mallah, R/o Shuklpur Hazara, Police Station Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur submitted a written complaint dated 23.06.2007 before Station Officer, Police Station Rampur Mathura to the effect that marriage of Dashrath, who was the real uncle of the complainant was performed one year three months back and to arrange money for the same, land of appellant Dashrath was mortgaged. It is alleged that appellant was frequently earning his livelihood outside. One day before the day of occurrence in the evening appellant came and asked the deceased to get his land released from mortgage, whereupon the deceased told the appellant that you are earning outside and out of your earning you should get your land released. Thereafter, the deceased left the place in anger and went towards the village. In the previous night when complainant was sleeping along with his father (deceased) and mother outside the door, at about 10.30 hours appellant Dashrath came there with knife in his hands and started cutting throat of the deceased. When deceased raised alarm, complainant and his mother Sukhmani rushed towards him and caught the appellant and raised alarm. Hearing the commotion, a large number of villagers rushed towards the spot having torch in their hands. Then the appellant rushed towards the northern side. This occurrence was seen by a large number of people of of village.
3. After sometime, deceased Jagan Mallah died and due to night and due to non availability of conveyance, immediate information could not be given to the police and dead body of the deceased was lying infront of the door. A request was made to the police for lodging the report and for taking action. This complaint was got scribed by one Angad Nishad, S/o Ram Aadhar Nishad, R/o Village Arjunpurwa, Police Station Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur.
4. On the basis of complaint, Chik F.I.R. was prepared and F.I.R. was lodged under Crime No. 164/2007, under Section 302 I.P.C. and an entry to this effect was made in G. D. Rapat No.17, at 9.15 hours on 23.06.2007. After lodging the F.I.R., investigation proceeded and inquest report was prepared. Investigating Officer collected plain soil and soil with blood from the scene of occurrence and the body of deceased was sent for post mortem. Post mortem was conducted in District Hospital Sitapur on 24.06.2007 at 4.30 P.M. and as per post mortem report one incised wound 12 C.M. X 2 C.M. X bone deep was found on the front of neck, 5 C.M. below chin. Underneath trachea, esophagus and right side carotid vessels cut.
5. Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence. Accused was apprehended and on his pointing out weapon of assault was recovered on 26.06.2017 and the spot memo of the said place was also prepared by the Investigating Officer. The clothing of the deceased along with recovered knife were sealed and sent for chemical examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Lucknow. After investigation, Investigating Officer filed charge-sheet against the appellant Dashrath under Section 302 I.P.C. and case was committed to the Court of Sessions by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur vide his committal order dated 05.09.2017 and the same was registered as Sessions Trial No. 848 of 2007 and after committal, charge was framed against the appe
