Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MANOJ MISRA, SAMEER JAIN, JJ.
Chandan Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Reference No.6 of 2021, Capital Cases No. -7 of 2021, Criminal Appeal No. 1861 of 2021
Decided on : 24-12-2021
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 read with Section 149 and 120-B - Section 161 and 311 - Arms Act - Section 3/25 - Offence of Murders - Circumstantial evidence - Gunshot injury - Motive - Death penalty - Appeal against conviction - Whether PW-12’s testimony could be considered trustworthy is what, now, falls for our consideration - Police of P.S. received information through Delta (code name of surveillance unit) that three bodies have been found in a village - On receipt of this information, the police rushes to the spot, lifts bodies from three separate places and brings them to the mortuary and carries inquest proceeding. These three bodies were found.
Finding of the Court :
An incident of single gunshot, no other injury, not preceded, or followed, by altercation, or exhortation, or threat, occurring at an open Chabutra adjoining the road, the assailant would have ample time to flee and disappear into the darkness of the night by the time PW-12, sleeping in the room upstairs, could wake up, come downstairs, open the main gate and come out of the confines of her house to witness the assailants running away. Her testimony, therefore, in our view, fails to qualify the test of being inherently probable - If a witness professed to know about a gravely incriminating circumstance against a person accused of the offence of murder and the witness kept silent for over two months regarding the said incriminating circumstance against the accused, his statement relating to the incriminating circumstances, in the absence of any cogent reason, was bound to lose most of its value - Once we discard the testimony of PW-12 as not reliable, nothing much remains to prove the involvement of the appellants in the murder. Because, as we have already noticed above, the weapon alleged to have been recovered at the pointing out of the appellant could not be connected by forensic evidence with the bullet recovered from the body of the two deceased - The weapon lying in open field, not buried, cannot be said to be in the possession of the appellant. We are therefore, of the firm view that the appellant is also entitled to be acquitted of the charge of an offence punishable under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act - Prosecution evidence has failed to bring home the guilt against either Chandan Singh or any of the other accused-appellants put to trial in respect of the three murders. Hence, the charge of murder against the accused-appellants including Chandan Singh is held not proved and, therefore, the conviction of the appellants including Chandan Singh for the murder of deceased persons set aside – judgment.
Result: Appeals allowed
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Misra, J.
1. (i) As both these appeals and the reference arise out of a common judgment and order dated 31.03.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Mathura in connected Sessions Trial Nos. 219 of 2019 and 220 of 2019, these two appeals and the reference are being decided/ answered by a common judgment and order.
(ii) In Sessions Trial No. 219 of 2019, arising out of case crime no.456 of 2018, P.S. Raya, District Mathura, five persons, namely, (i) Chandan Singh, (ii) Kali Charan @ Karuwa, both sons of Chittar Singh;
(iii) Anil son of Kali Charan,
(iv) Gajraj son of Gulab Singh; and
(v) Smt. Bhago Devi @ Bhagwati Devi wife of Chandan Singh, were put on trial. Chandan Singh, Kali Charan, Anil and Gajraj were charged for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C.; and Smt. Bhago Devi was charged under Section 302 read with Section 120-B I.P.C. In this Sessions Trial No.219 of 2019, the accused Chandan Singh, Kali Charan @ Karuwa; Anil and Gajraj have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and have been punished as follows:-
(iii) Chandan Singh awarded death penalty; whereas, Kali Charan @ Karuwa, Anil and Gajraj were awarded life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 50,000/-. Bhago Devi was however acquitted.
(iv) In Sessions Trial No. 220 of 2019, arising out of case crime no.460 of 2018, P.S. Raya, District Mathura, Chandan Singh alone was tried and convicted under Section 3/25 Arms Act and awarded punishment of three years R.I. with fine of Rs. 10,000/-and a default sentence of three months.
(v) Capital Case Appeal No. 7 of 2021 has been filed by Chandan Singh against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Mathura in Sessions Trial No. 219 of 2019 and Sessions Trial No. 220 of 2019 against his conviction and sentence under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and 3/25 Arms Act. Likewise, as capital punishment has been awarded to Chandan Singh the court below has made a reference for confirmation of death penalty, which is Reference No.6 of 2021 and is connected with the appeal.
(vi) Criminal Appeal No. 1861 of 2021 has been filed by Kali Charan @ Karuwa, Anil and Gajraj against the judgment and order dated 31.03.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Mathura in Sessions Trial No. 219 of 2019 against conviction of these appellants under Section 302/34 I.P.C.
INTRODUCTORY FACTS IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER
2. (i) On 19.06.2018, at about 6.20 am, the police of P.S. Raya, District Mathura received information through Delta (code name of surveillance unit) that three bodies have been found in a village named Nagla Bharau under PS. Raya, District Mathura. On receipt of this information, the police rushes to the spot, lifts the bodies from three separate places and brings them to the mortuary and carries inquest proceeding. These three bodies were of (a) Sundar Singh son of Chittar Singh (Deceased No. 1 for short D-1); (b) Satya Prakash Singh son of Gudar Singh (Deceased No.2 for short D-2); and (c) Bhawar Singh son of Ramji Lal (Deceased No.3 for short D-3).
(ii) Inquest proceeding of Bhawar Singh commences in the mortuary at about 11.40 am and is completed by 12.50 pm on 19.06.2018 resulting in inquest report (Exb. Ka-34), prepared by Sub-Inspector R.K. Gautam (PW-14). The witnesses to this inquest are Surya Sain (PW-5); Brij Kishore; Ram Khilari; Rajpal Singh; and Mukesh.
(iii) Inquest proceeding of Satya Prakash Singh is also conducted at the mortuary by SSI Daya Narayan Singh (PW-11) and is completed by 12 noon on 19.06.2018 resulting in inquest report (Exb. Ka-24), prepared by Daya Narayan Singh (PW-11) which is witnessed by Budh Singh son of Bhudar Singh (PW-6); Narendra son of Raghuveer Singh; Rahul son of Budh Singh; Surya Sain son of Satya Prakash Singh (PW-5); and Deepak Singh.
(iv) Inquest proceeding of Sundar Singh is also conducted at the mortuary by S.I. R.K. Gautam (PW-14) on 19.06.2018 and is completed by 13.40 pm,
If a witness professed to know about a gravely incriminating circumstance against a person accused of offence of murder and witness kept silent for over two months regarding said incriminating circum....
It is also well settled that if other evidence on record clearly establishes that the deceased was murdered by a person, then the factum of motive loses its importance.
Point of Law : Conviction on the basis of statements of two police officials alone is not sustainable.
The prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on uncorroborated witness testimony, especially from related parties, is insufficient for conviction.
Confessions leading to the recovery of evidence are admissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, and circumstantial evidence can be sufficient for conviction in murder cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on trustworthy and reliable testimony of prosecution witnesses, despite their relationship to the deceased, to establish the guilt of ....
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
