IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, SHIV SHANKER PRASAD, JJ.
Veerpal – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2339, 3069 of 2015
Decided on : 31-01-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 307, 366, 34 - Arms Act, 1959 - Section 25 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 161, 313, 437-A - Enmity - Murder offence - Appeal against conviction - Appeals are by accused who have been convicted vide judgment and order passed - Held, Contradiction in testimony of P.W.-2 with regard to place of occurrence i.e. whether while going to temple or on return from temple; disappearance of motorcycle and non furnishing of details in that regard; contradictory version of P.W.-2 with regard to surroundings of place of occurrence; non production of Rukam Singh and his maternal uncle Indrapal (scribe); P.W.-2 not being a witness of inquest or recovery etc. have clearly been overlooked – Court below has clearly erred in law in arriving at a finding that prosecution has established its case beyond reasonable doubt on basis of evidence led in matter - Court find that prosecution has not been able to establish guilt of accused appellants beyond reasonable doubt and accused appellants are entitled to benefit of doubt in matter - Impugned judgment and order Court below is hereby set aside – Appeals allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. These appeals are by the accused appellants- Veerpal and Bhadrapal, who have been convicted vide judgment and order dated 02.06.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chandausi, (Moradabad) in Session Trial Nos. 629 of 2010 and 630 of 2010, arising out of Case Crime Nos. 743 of 2009 and 22 of 2010, under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and Section 25 of Arms Act, Police Station Bahjoi, District Moradabad and sentenced to life imprisonment each under Section 302 I.P.C. along with fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo two months additional imprisonment each.
2. The prosecution case is based upon a written report of the informant Vijaypal (P.W.-2) son of Nawab Singh, who claims to be a resident of Village Lehra Nagla Shyam, Police Station Gunnaur, District Budaun. It is alleged that the informant has enmity with one Veerpal S/o Sipattar Singh Yadav (accused appellant). The brother of accused Veerpal namely, Munipal had eloped with Sunita daughter of one Ganga Sahay Sharma. The informant’s brother Mahipal (deceased) was a witness in the F.I.R. lodged under Section 366 I.P.C. against Munipal for enticing Sunita. On account of this enmity firing had taken place between the accused and the informant sometime back. On 16.11.2009 the informant’s brother Mahipal alongwith the informant Vijaypal and one Rukam Singh S/o of Nawab Singh Yadav left on a motorcycle for offering prayers and served water (Jal) at Sadat Wadi Mandir and for purchasing fertilizer thereafter. While on their way at about 02:30 p.m. a kilometer before the Sadat Wadi Temple, the accused namely Veerpal, Munipal sons of Sipattar Singh and Bhadrapal son of Latoori Singh stopped them and the three accused dragged the informant’s brother Mahipal aside and indiscriminately fired on him. Mahipal sustained fire arm injuries on his head and chest. Mahipal died on the spot and the dead body was lying there.
3. The contents of the above referred written report were entered in the G.D. and a first information report came to be lodged in the matter and got registered as Case Crime No. 743 of 2009 under Section 302 I.P.C. against accused appellant Veer Pal, Munipal and Bhadrapal. The accused Munipal has been declared a juvenile. The two other accused namely, Veerpal and Bhadrapal have been convicted and sentenced under Section 302 I.P.C. and are before this Court in the present appeals.
4. Pursuant to the F.I.R. lodged in the matter the Investigating Officer proceeded on the spot and collected blood stained and plain soil along with three empty cartridges of 315 bore from the spot. The recovery made from the spot has been exhibited as Ka-2. One Mahendrapal and Chhatrapal are the witnesses of this recovery. The police also conducted inquest of the dead body and its report is exhibited as Ka-1. The inquest report contains an overwriting and the time for receipt of information is shown as 04:00 p.m. in place of 05:00 p.m. The inquest witnesses are Mahendra Singh, Chhatrapal, Manoj Kumar, Bharat Singh and Chhote, who are all resident of Village Sadat Wadi and Satnauli. None of the inquest witnesses are from village Lehra Nagla Shyam to which the informant or the deceased belonged. At the last page of inquest the Investigating Officer has recorded the time of completion of inquest as 05:30 p.m. As per the opinion of the inquest witnesses the deceased died due to fire arm injuries and for ascertaining the cause of death post mortem be conducted. The body was accordingly sealed and was delivered to constable Surendra Kumar and Veerendra for being sent to the mortuary.
5. The post mortem on the dead body has been conducted on the next day i.e. on 17.11.2009 at 03:00 p.m. by Dr. N.L. Sharma (P.W.-6). As per the autopsy surgeon, the deceased sustained following ante-mortem injuries:-
(II) Gun shot wound of exit 11 c.m. x 4 c.m.
Merely, because they have not been examined is not a ground to disbelieve an otherwise credible ocular account rendered by a person injured in the incident whose presence, otherwise also, is natural ....
Discrepancies in eyewitness accounts undermined the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to reasonable doubt of their involvement in the crime.
The court upheld the conviction for murder but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for extreme caution in imposing capital punishment.
The need for reliable witness testimonies and corroborating evidence, especially in the absence of independent witnesses, to establish charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, including the place of occurrence and the examination of crucial ....
The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in witness statements and unreliability of witnesses can lead to the acquittal of the accused.
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.