Back
2019 Supreme(All) 1929
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
NAHEED ARA MOONIS, ANIL KUMAR, JJ.
Hasam and Another - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2963 of 2009
Decided On : 22-10-2019
Advocate Appeared:
Sushil Kumar Pandey, Adv., Abhinav Singh, Adv., Anil Raghav, Adv., Brijesh Sahai, Adv., Nazrul Islam Jafri, Adv., Veer Singh, Adv., Bakhtyar Yusuf, Adv.
Eyewitness testimonies, despite minor discrepancies, can substantiate a conviction under Section 302 IPC when corroborated by medical evidence, especially in cases involving personal vendettas.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - Criminal Procedure Code - Registration of FIR - The appellants, Hasam and Nazam, were convicted for the murder of Ajaz, driven by personal vendetta. The trial court's decision was based on eyewitness accounts supported by medical evidence, with no major contradictions undermining the prosecution's case. Issues of potential motive were deemed secondary. Procedural lapses in investigation did not negate the reliability of eyewitnesses. The FIR was registered promptly following the incident, reinforcing the case against the appellants. (Paras 1, 45, 62, 67)
(B) Criminal Law - Eyewitness Testimony - The testimonies of the eyewitnesses, Mohabbat Ali and Aladeen, were held credible despite minor contradictions, confirming the sequence and nature of the incident and establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 47, 63)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case involving murder. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. court observes reliability of witness testimonies despite minor contradictions. (Para 41 , 42 , 44 , 49 , 50 , 62 , 63 , 68) |
| 3. arguments raise doubts about witness credibility and case motive. (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 54 , 56 , 58) |
| 4. establishes that absence of motive does not invalidate prosecution case. (Para 59 , 60 , 64 , 69) |
| 5. final decision affirms conviction of the accused for murder. (Para 70 , 71) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR, J.
1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23.04.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 9, Muzaffarnagar in Sessions Trial No. 405 of 2005 (State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Hasam and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 06 of 2005 under Section 302 Indian Penal Code (here-in-after referred to as "I.P.C."), Police Station- Chhapar, District- Muzaffarnagar whereby both the appellants Hasam and Nazam have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under I.P.C. with default stipulation.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that the informant Mohabbat Ali has lodged F.I.R. on 16.01.2005 at 05:15 p.m. at police station- Chhapar, District- Muzaffarnagar alleging therein that on 16.01.2005 he along with Haneef, Aladeen and his brother Ajaz (deceased) were taking off peels of the sugarcane in the field of Ajaz. At about 4:30 p.m. both the accused Hasam and Nazam came there with Tamancha (country made pistol) in their hands and said that Ajaz was the pairokar of civil case pending in the court, he must not be spared alive. Both the assailants fired with their respective weapons on Ajaz (brother of the informant) who received fire arm injuries on right side back and left eye and died on the spot. The entry was made in G.D. of police station as Report No. 24 at 17:15 hrs. on 16.01.2005 and investigation was taken up by PW-4 Virendra Singh the then posted as Station Officer at police station Chhapar.
3. After the registration of the F.I.R. at police station, Investigating Officer proceeded to the spot with necessary relevant papers and started investigation of the case. He directed Sub-Inspector Prem Prakash Giri (PW-5) to conduct the inquest of the deceased on spot. The inquest proceeding commenced at 6:30 p.m. and completed at 8:30 p.m. on 16.01.2005. Inquest report is exhibit Ka-6. In the inquest report opinion was expressed unanimously that deadbody be sent for postmortem examination so that cause of death could be ascertained properly. In the process certain relevant papers were prepared by PW-5 and he has prepared inquest report, photo nash exhibit Ka-7. Letter to R.I. exhibit Ka-8, letter to C.M.O. exhibit Ka-9. After conducting inquest and observing necessary formalities, the deadbody was entrusted to two constables Udai Veer Singh and Harpal Singh for postmortem examination.
4. Thereafter postmortem examination of the deadbody of Ajaz was conducted by Dr. Rajesh Singh PW-3 at 2:40 p.m. on 17.01.2005 at district hospital Muzaffarnagar. Postmortem report is exhibit Ka-2. According to the postmortem report doctor has found following ante-mortem injuries on the deadbody of the deceased:-
(i) Firearm entry wound size 1.5 cm X = cm on left eye-brow margins are inverted an area of blackening 07cm X 5.5 cm on left front forehead.
(ii) Exit wound- Size 2.5 cm X 1.5 cm on just below the left mandible 2.5 cm from left ear. Margins are everted and irregular edges. Injury no. 1 is corresponding to injury no. 2 i.e. wound of exit. The path is communicating from injury no. 1 to no. 2 maxillary bone upper side fracture present.
(iii) Firearm injury size 4.5 cm X 3 cm on Rt. Side of back of chest, 5 cm below from scapula & 16 cm from midline (vertebral column) wound margins are inverted and lacerated the wound is extended inner right & left lung and to accending aorta 7th & 8th right ribs are fractured. Pellets recovered from both lungs.
5. Doctor opined that t
