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

2021 Supreme(All) 129

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUBHASH CHAND, J.
Narendra Prasad - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 4031 of 2019
Decided On : 18-02-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Kedar Nath Mishra.
For the Respondent: G.A.

The nature of injury being simple or grievous is irrelevant for distinguishing between different sections of IPC. The burden of proving the plea of alibi shifts to the accused only if the prosecution proves its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

Acid Attack - Criminal Appeal - IPC 326-A, 504, 506 - The court discussed the provisions of IPC 326-A, which includes causing grievous hurt by acid attack. The court highlighted the interpretation that the nature of injury being simple or grievous is irrelevant for distinguishing between different sections of IPC. The plea of alibi was also considered, with the burden of proving it shifting to the accused if the prosecution proves the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court found the prosecution's case not proved beyond reasonable doubt and allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment and ordering the release of the appellant.

Fact of the Case:

The victim, Smt. Neeraj Devi, was attacked with acid by her husband, Narendra Prasad, at her parental house. The prosecution alleged that Narendra Prasad threw acid on her body and face, causing severe injuries. The defense claimed that the appellant was in Delhi at the time of the occurrence and was falsely implicated due to enmity.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the prosecution's case not proved beyond reasonable doubt. It noted contradictions in the victim's statement and the lack of corroboration from other witnesses. The plea of alibi was considered, and the burden of proving it was found not to shift to the accused due to the prosecution's failure to prove its case.

Issues: The key issues included the credibility of the victim's testimony, the delay in lodging the FIR, and the plea of alibi raised by the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the nature of injury being simple or grievous is irrelevant for distinguishing between different sections of IPC. It also clarified the burden of proof for the plea of alibi, stating that it shifts to the accused only if the prosecution proves its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the judgment and order convicting the appellant were set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be released from jail.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant Criminal Appeal is against the judgment and order dated 30.3.2019 in Sessions Trial No. 104 of 2015 (State vs. Narendra Prasad) arising out of Case Crime No. 1426 of 2014 under sections 326-A, 504 and 506 of IPC, P.S. Gauri Bazar, District Deoria passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge (Essential Commodities Act) Deoria whereby the accused Narendra Prasad was held guilty and was punished for the offence under Sections 326-A of IPC with rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and a fine of Rs. 20,000/- in default of payment of fine, the additional rigorous imprisonment of 4 months was to be undergone; for the offence under section 504 of IPC was punished with rigorous imprisonment of one year and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, 10 days additional imprisonment was to be undergone; and for the offence under section 506 of IPC was punished with rigorous imprisonment of one year and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, 10 days additional imprisonment was to be undergone. All these sentences were directed to run concurrently and the amount of Rs. 15,000/- out of the imposed amount of fine was to be paid to the victim.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the informant Smt. Neeraj Devi moved a written information with the police station concerned with these allegations that she was married with Narendra Prasad resident of village Patharhat, District Deoria four years ago. At present she had been residing at the parental house Village Chariaon Bujurg, P.S. Gauriganj, District Deoria. Her husband Narendra Prasad had thrown acid on her body and face on 22.10.2014 at 10 O’clock of night while she was asleep whereby she was bitterly scorched. After having thrown acid on her and hurling filthy abuses her husband fled away extending life threat. Her husband had not permitted her to reside in the matrimonial house and had also criminally intimidated to her and her children. She was rushed to the hospital for treatment. After getting some relief this report was given to the police station concerned. It was written by Sanjay Kumar, son of Chandra Bhan, resident of village Chariaon Bujurg, P.S. Gauriganj, District Deoria and same was singed by the informant Smt. Neeraj Devi. On this written information Case Crime No. 247 of 2014 was registered against Narendra Prasad under sections 326-A, 504 and 506 of IPC with the Police Station Gauriganj, District Deoria on 26.10.2014.The Investing Officer after having concluded investigation filed charge sheet against the accused Narendra Prasad to the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoria, who took cognizance on the charge sheet and committed the same for trial to the court of Sessions.

3. The trial court framed the charge against the accused Narendra Prasad under sections 326-A, 504 and 506 of IPC. The charge was read over and explained to the accused who denied the charge and claimed to be tried.

4. On behalf of the prosecution to prove the charge against the accused in documentary evidence filed the written information Exb.Ka-1, site plan of the place of occurrence Exb.Ka-2, Charge-sheet Exb. Ka-3, injury report of victim Exb.Ka-4, GD entry in regard to registering the case crime Exb. Ka-5, recovery memo of taking into possession cloth of victim & Laltain Exb. Ka-6 and check FIR Exb. Ka-7.

5. In ocular evidence on behalf of prosecution the following witnesses were examined; PW-1 Smt. Neeraj Devi, PW-2 Smt. Subhawati Devi, PW-3 Chandra Bhan, PW-4 SI Vinay Kumar Singh, PW-5 Dr. Indra Dev Gaur and PW-6 H.C. Ram Chandra Yadav, PW-7 Yogendra Singh and CW-1 H.C. Brahma Nand Chaudhary.

6. The statement of accused Narenda Prasad under section 313 of Cr.P.C., was recorded in which he denied the incriminating circumstances in the evidence against him and stated that on the date of occurrence he was in Delhi where he had been residing since 2013 and he had been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. On behalf of accused in defence evidence exami

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        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