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

2023 Supreme(All) 1421

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, UMESH CHANDRA SHARMA, JJ.
Ishtiyak – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.4700 of 2019, Criminal Appeal No. 2916 of 2018
Decided on : 29-08-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sufiya Bano, Anil Kumar, Apul Misra, Ashok Kumar Singh, Aushim Luthra, Mohd Akhtar, Hemant Kumar Singh, Rajrshi Gupta,
For the Respondent: G.A., Avadhesh Singh,Ramesh Chandra Gupta-II

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307 - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 313 - Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(2)(v) - Conviction for unlawful assembly leading to murder - Convicted under Sections 148 and 302 IPC, sentenced to life with fines - Gufran and Saddik, despite challenges, found culpable based on witness testimonies and prior enmity - Evidence from close relatives and well-acquainted individuals is both credible and sufficient for conviction. (Paras 2-5, 22-23, 102-104)

Facts of the case:
Informant Jagdish registered a complaint after an attack by the accused where his brother Faujdar was shot, following a longstanding enmity. The FIR was lodged promptly, and witnesses corroborated the events. (Paras 6-7, 12-20)

Findings of Court:
The court confirmed the validity of the FIR, affirmed the motive, and highlighted the role of prior enmity in establishing the common object of the accused. The court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to uphold the convictions under the cited sections. (Paras 24-102)

Issues: The court addressed the credibility of witness testimonies, the significance of prior enmity, and the interpretation of common object within the legal framework. (Paras 102-103)

Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that membership in an unlawful assembly stems from knowledge of the assembly's common objective, emphasizing the sufficiency of evidence from identification and motive grounds. (Paras 75-90, 104)

Result: Appeals dismissed; accused ordered to serve sentences.

Table of Content
1. details of the appeals and convictions (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6)
2. factual background of the criminal case (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. witness testimonies corroborate the incident (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. assessment of motive and mens rea (Para 24 , 25 , 26)
5. common object and participation in unlawful assembly (Para 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63)
6. final ruling and order of conviction (Para 105 , 106)

JUDGMENT :

Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

1. Heard Sri Apul Misra, learned counsel for all the accused-appellants, Sri Vikas Goswami, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. Criminal Appeal No.2916 of 2018 has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 04.04.2018 passed in ST No.642 of 1996 (State of UP Vs. Allau and others) arising out of Case Crime No.121 of 1996, by Sri Santosh Kumar Tiwari, Additional Sessions Judge-II, Azamgarh by which the trial court convicted the accused persons namely Allau under Section 148 IPC for fine of Rs.3,000/-, under Section 302 IPC for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.25,000/-, under Section 307 /149 IPC for five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-; accused Saddik under Section 148 IPC for fine of Rs.3,000/-, under Section 302 /149 IPC for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.25,000/-, under Section 307 IPC for five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-; accused Gufran under Section 148 IPC for fine of Rs.3,000/-, under Section 302 /149 IPC for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.25,000/-, under Section 307 /149 IPC for five years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-with default stipulation. It was also directed that all the sentences shall run concurrently.

3. Out of the above three convicts Allau has died and accused Gufran and Saddik are alive and are on bail.

4. Since accused Allau has died, hence Criminal Appeal No.2010 of 2018 had been abated vide order dated 11.01.2019.

5. Accused Ishtiyak has preferred Criminal Appeal No.4700 of 2019 against the judgment and order of conviction and sentencing dated 27.06.2019 passed in ST No.642-A of 1996 ( State of UP Vs. Ishtiyak ) arising out of Case Crime No.121 of 1996, by Sri Gaurav Kumar Srivastava, Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Azamgarh by which the accused Ishtiyak was convicted under Section 148 IPC for Rs.3,000/-as fine, under Section 302 /149 IPC for life imprisonment and Rs.25,000/-as fine, under Section 307 /149 IPC for five years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.5,000/-fine with default stipulation and an amount of

6. In brief, facts of the case are that informant Jagdish son of Ram Singar Harijan moved a written complaint dated 21.04.1996 at Police Station Kotwali Deogaon, District Azamgarh that in the night of 21.06.1996 at about 12:45 a.m. Allau, Ismidar, Gufran, Ishtiyak, Jahid and Saddik who have enmity with Kalpnath of his village on account of a litigation in which scuffle had taken place last year and he had testified himself, reached at his door with country-made pistol and revolver and exhorted to kill him. In the meantime, Allau fired at his brother Faujdar which hit him. Hearing the hue and cry villagers Nandlal, Vikrama and other villagers reached there. By then Saddik with an intention to kill him fired upon him from which he narrowly escaped. The incident was seen by several persons present on the spot. Abusing them the accused persons had returned. Keeping the injured Faujdar on the cot when he was coming to the police station, Faujdar fell unconscious on the way (Faujdar later on succumbed). Hence, FIR be lodged and necessary action be taken.

7. On the basis of above written complaint an FIR at Crime No.121 of 1996, under Sections 147 , 148, 149, 302, 307, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(x), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short ‘the SC/ST Act’) had been lodged at 01:50 a.m. on 21.06.1996. The investigation offi

    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