IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, SHIV SHANKER PRASAD, JJ.
Manjoor Alam @ Nirahu - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2126 of 2013
Decided On : 16-11-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302, 307, 308, 326 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 161, 313, 437A – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32 – Offence of murder – Attempt to murder – Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means – Examination of witnesses by police – Appeal is by accused challenging his conviction in Sessions Trial arising out of Case Crime, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station, District whereby he has been sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment along with fine and on its failure to undergo further incarceration – Held, Recovery of clothes and plastic bottle by prosecution at best shows that injury was caused to deceased by throwing of acid – Burn injury caused to injured is otherwise not disputed – In such circumstances, mere recovery of burnt clothes or plastic bottle, etc, would be sufficient to prove cause of injury but it cannot be relied upon to implicate appellant when there is otherwise no evidence to connect him to commissioning of offence itself – Responsibility of prosecution is not only to prove that offence was committed but it has to prove that commissioning of offence is by accused appellant in manner disclosed by prosecution – Recovery made after two months of alleged incident, therefore, would not be a material circumstance to implicate appellant – Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.
1. This appeal is by the accused Manjoor Alam @ Nirahu challenging his conviction in Sessions Trial No. 8 of 2009 arising out of Case Crime No. 796 of 2008, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Kolhui, District Maharajganj; whereby he has been sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.10000/- and on its failure to undergo further incarceration of two years.
2. The prosecution case proceeds on a written report dated 11.9.2008 (Exhibit Ka-1) by the informant (PW-1), who happens to be the father of the deceased, stating that he is a resident of District Maharajganj and his son Ramjan has returned about a month ago from Saudi and was sleeping with his wife Noorjahan (PW-2) on the roof. On 6.9.2008 at about 10.00 in the night the accused appellant who was residing at Bahduri on rent, on account of enmity came on the roof and threw acid on his son and daughter-in-law. The injured son was taken to Gorakhpur for treatment and the doctors have referred him for further treatment to Delhi where he is admitted and undergoing treatment. The son of the informant was not in a position to speak and the daughter-in-law (PW-2) who had sustained lesser injuries is being treated by doctor Maurya. Having returned from Delhi the report has been lodged with the request to take appropriate action. On the basis of the above report the first information report got registered as Case Crime No. 796 of 2008 at 8.35 pm on 11.9.2008.
3. The investigation proceeded and a plastic bottle used for throwing acid together with certain acid burnt clothes (Lungi and Odhani) were recovered vide Exhibit Ka-8 on 2.11.2008. After nearly three months of the incident the injured son of the informant died on 15.12.2008 at about 8.00 pm and an intimation of such fact was given to the Investigating Officer on 16.12.2008.
4. Initially the FIR was lodged under section 308 and 326 IPC but after the death of injured the offence was altered to one under Section 302 IPC. It may also be noticed that the offence under Section 308 IPC was also altered to Section 307 IPC during the course of investigation. The Investigating Officer proceeded in the matter and collected medico legal case sheet cover as also the summary prepared by the Medical College at Gorakhpur. The case sheet shows that the injured was admitted at the Medical College at Gorakhpur on 7.9.2008 at 1.45 am and doctor has mentioned it to be a case of burn injury. The informant had informed the doctor that someone had thrown acid on the son of the informant while he was sleeping at about 11.00 pm. To similar effect is the document at Page 9 of the paper book wherein the doctor has recorded that it is a case of acid burn where acid was thrown by someone at around 11.00 pm on 6.9.2008 while the patient was sleeping. The Investigation ultimately concluded with submission of chargesheet (Ex.Ka-9) against the accused appellant. The implication of the accused appellant apparently surfaced on the basis of statement made by PW-2 and PW-1 who stated that the acid has been thrown on the deceased by the accused appellant.
5. The Magistrate took cognizance upon the charge-sheet and committed the case to the Court of Sessions wherein charges were framed against the accused appellant under Section 302 IPC. The accused appellant denied the accusations made against him and demanded trial. The trial accordingly commenced in which prosecution has produced three witnesses of fact namely Noor Ali (PW-1) (informant/father of the deceased); Noorjahan (PW-2) (wife of the deceased) and PW-3 Hamid, who happens to be the father of PW-2 and lives in an adjoining house but was sleeping next to PW-1 at the time of occurrence.
6. PW-1 in his statement has clearly stated that on the fateful night the deceased was sleeping with his wife (PW-2) on the roof of the house when the accused appellant on account of prior enmity came on the roof and threw acid on his son and daughter-in-law. The injured and his
The court ruled that inconsistencies in dying declarations and inadequate evidence undermine a murder conviction, emphasizing the need for reliable corroboration.
Where there are more than one statement in the nature of dying declaration, one first in point of time must be preferred. Of course, if the plurality of dying declaration could be held to be trustwor....
Dying declarations can be the basis for conviction if they are found to be truthful and voluntary; however, they must be carefully scrutinized, especially in the absence of corroborative evidence.
Dying declarations, if consistent and credible, can support a conviction without corroboration, as established by the court.
A dying declaration can support a murder conviction if recorded properly and inspires confidence, irrespective of corroboration, considering the surrounding circumstances.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for voluntary, truthful, and reliable dying declarations, along with the importance of corroboration, consistency, and surroundi....
The court emphasized that a dying declaration must be corroborated and reliable; procedural irregularities and delays in lodging the FIR can undermine its credibility.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.