Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Sunita Agarwal, Ajay Bhanot, JJ.
Indar - Appellant
Vs.
State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 1987
Decided On : 11-11-2020
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 and Section 201 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 313 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 106 – Offence of Murder – Appeal against conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge - Motive - common object of you all did commit murder of deceased by intentionally causing his death and you thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. and within by cognizance - IIndly that you on the same date time and place knowing that the murder of deceased has been committed to threw the dead body of said deceased in canal for concealing the evidence of murder of screening yourself from legal punishment and thereby committed an offence - Held, While adverting to the circumstantial evidence, the learned court below upheld recoveries of the personal articles of deceased, namely, his kurta, tobacco pouch and pyjama. These recoveries linked the accused-appellant with the crime. The accused-appellant was seen in the company of the deceased by various witnesses. But he could not offer an explanation for the death of deceased. The illicit relations between both accused , wife of deceased, provided the motive for crime. Thus in the opinion of the learned trial court the chain of incriminating circumstances was complete - Accused-appellant is not guilty as charged for the murder of deceased and destruction of evidence. We acquit the accused-appellant of the aforesaid charges under Section 302/201 I.P.C., for which he was prosecuted - Criminal Appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Bhanot, J.
1. This criminal appeal arises out of the judgment dated 23.12.1986 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Bulandshahr, in Sessions Trial No. 08 of 1986, State Vs. Indar and others, convicting the appellant for offences under Section 302 and Section 201 of the I.P.C., and imposing punishments of life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment of two years for the respective offences.
2. The prosecution case originated in an F.I.R. lodged on 13.01.1985, at Police Station Dankaur, District Bulandshahr, as Case Crime No.8 of 1985.
3. The Investigation Officer made his investigation and on 11.03.1985 submitted a chargesheet in court against the accused persons.
4. The case was registered as Sessions Trial No. 08 of 1986, State Vs. Indar and Others. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Bulandshahr, on 11.04.1986 charged the accused as follows:
IIndly that you on the same date time and place knowing that the murder of Gangaram has been committed to threw the dead body of said Gangaram in canal for concealing the evidence of the murder of screening yourself from legal punishment and thereby committed an offence, punishable under section 201 I.P.C. within my cognizance.
And I hereby direct that you be tried by this court on the said charge.”
5. The accused pleaded not guilty and the case then went to trial.
6. The narrative will be structured in the following framework:
| I | Outline of documentary evidence adduced by prosecution: | ||
| i. | F.I.R. | ||
| ii. | Recovery of articles | ||
| iii. | Inquest Report | ||
| iv. | Postmortem report | ||
| v. | Site Plans | ||
| vi. | Chargesheet | ||
| vii. | Witnesses | ||
| II | Arguments by counsels | ||
| III | Brief statement of FIR | ||
| IV | Testimonies of witnesses | ||
| V | Statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. | ||
| VI | Concept of circumstantial evidence : Legal perspective | ||
| VII | Appraisal of evidence/Chain of circumstances incriminating the accused: | ||
| i. | F.I.R. | ||
| ii. | Recovery Memos | ||
| iii. | Inquest Report | ||
| iv. | Postmortem Report, Evidence of expert witness, cause and time of death. | ||
| v. | Motive | ||
| vi. | Last Seen: a. Legal perspective b. Evaluation of evidence | ||
| vii. | Investigation | ||
| VIII | Findings | ||
| IX | Analysis of trial court judgment | ||
| X | Final Directions/Result of appeal | ||
I. Outline of documentary evidence adduced by prosecution:
7. The prosecution introduced both oral and documentary evidences during the trial to bring home the guilt as outlined below:
ii. Recovery of articles
8. Recovery Memos dated 14.01.1985 (marked as Exh. Ka-3 and Exh. Ka-4) depicting recovery of personal articles of deceased.
iii. Inquest Report after recovery of dead body
9. Inquest report dated 18.01.1985 (marked as Exh. Ka-5) prepared on the date the dead body was recovered.
iv. Postmortem Report
10. Postmortem report (marked as Exh.Ka-2) dated 19.01.1985.
v. Site Plans and others documentations related to the crime:
11. Map of the dead body, Challan of the dead body and letters addressed to Atisaar Nirikshak and Chief Medical Officer (marked as Exh. Ka 6 to Ka 9 respectively). Site plan of the place from where the dead body was recovered (marked as Exh. Ka 10). Maps of the places where Kurta and tobacco pouch, and pyjama, were recovered (marked as Exh. Ka 11 and Exh. Ka 12, respectively).
vi. Charge-sheet
12. Charge-sheet submitted by the Investigation Officer before the learned trial court on 11.03.1985 under Sections 302/34/201 I.P.C. against the accused
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
