Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH)
Ved Prakash Vaish, Mohd Faiz Alam Khan, JJ.
Ranjeet @ Jamidar - Appellant
Vs.
State Of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 286 of 2002
Decided On : 07-11-2019
Dying Declaration - Indian Evidence Act - Section 32, Cr.P.C. - Sections 161 and 162 - [FACT OF THE CASE] The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine. The deceased, Smt. Shivkali, was allegedly attacked by the appellant with an axe, resulting in her death. The appellant denied complicity and claimed false implication. [FINDING OF THE COURT] The trial court found the appellant guilty and convicted him for the offence under Sections 302/324 of I.P.C. [ISSUES] The main issues were the admissibility of the dying declaration, delay in lodging the F.I.R., and the non-examination of material witnesses. [RATIO DECIDENDI] The court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, Cr.P.C., and case law to determine the admissibility of the dying declaration. It held that the statement recorded by the police under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., falling within the provisions of clause (1) of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, is relevant and admissible. The court also considered the delay in lodging the F.I.R. and the non-examination of material witnesses, concluding that these factors did not entitle the appellant to the benefit of doubt. [FINAL DECISION] The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's conviction was upheld.
JUDGMENT :
Ved Prakash Vaish, J.
Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned amicus curiae for the appellant and Sri Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, learned Addl. G.A. for the State.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22nd December, 2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Sultanpur, in Sessions Trial No.353 of 1996 titled as State vs. Ranjeet @ Jamidar, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "I.P.C.") and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine for a sum of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant has also been convicted for the offence under Section 324 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine for a sum of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.
3. The facts as unfolded during trial of the case are that the complainant, Ram Bahadur Yadav S/o Dwarika Prasad lodged a complaint on 15.05.1996, in which, he stated that on the intervening night of 14/15.05.1996 at about 11:00 PM, marriage procession (barat) had come to his village, on hearing of yelling of mother of Murali S/o Lal Bahadur, he went towards her house and saw that the appellant, Ranjeet @ Jamidar, who belongs to his village was beating to his bhabhi, Shivkali with kulhadi (axe) as a result of which she received injuries on her head and stomach, when he tried to separate her, he was also attacked on head by accused, when they cried then Murali, Chhatai and other persons came there and at that time Ranjeet @ Jamidar ran away from the spot.
4. On the basis of the said complaint, the First Information Report (hereinafter referred to as "F.I.R.") No.28 of 1996 for the offence under Sections 324/307 of I.P.C. was recorded as Case Crime No.95 of 1996 at Police Station Munshiganj, District Sultanpur. The same is recorded in general diary as report No.2. During investigation, the injured, namely, Shivkali and Ram Bahadur Yadav were medically examined, statement of injured, Smt. Shivkali was recorded. The injured, Smt. Shivkali died on 15.05.1996, inquest paper was prepared, postmortem got conducted by Dr. C.P. Tiwari at District Hospital Sultanpur. After completion of the investigation, chargesheet for the offence under Sections 302 and 324 of I.P.C. was filed against the appellant. After complying with the provisions of Section 207 of I.P.C., the case was committed to learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur.
5. After hearing both the parties and considering the record of the case, on 20th November, 1998, learned trial court found sufficient ground to proceed against the appellant, Ranjeet @ Jamidar for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 324 of I.P.C. The appellant abjured his guilt and claimed trial.
6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses. PW-1, Ram Bahadur Yadav is the complainant, he has proved the complaint as Ex. KA-1. PW-2, Chhotai is an eyewitness, he deposed that marriage procession (barat) had come to his house about four years ago in the month of May, marriage procession (barat) had come to his house at about 11:00 PM, he heard yelling of Smt. Shivkali widow of Lal Bahadur, he reached at her door and saw that Ranjeet was giving beating to Shivkali with kulhadi (axe), when Ram Bahadur Yadav was tired to separate them then Ranjeet inflicted kulhadi (axe) on him also, there was a light of lamp on the door of Shivkali, Murali also reached there, who saw the incident, Murali is the elder son of Smt. Shivkali, he identified accused/appellant, Ranjeet who inflicted injuries on the head and stomach of Shivkali and Ram Bahadur received two injuries, Ram Bahadur and Ram Shankar took Shivkali to Police Station and case was registered and Shivkali was sent to District Hospital where she d
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
