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
| 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
Allauddin Mian Vs. State of Bihar
Ashok Kumar Chaudhary Vs. State of Bihar
Avtar Singh Vs. State of Haryana
Bishu Sarkar and others Vs. State of West Bengal
Bhagwan Jagannath Markad Vs. State of Maharashtra
Chittarmal, Moti Vs. State of Rajasthan
Dilawar Singh Vs. State of Haryana
Dimple Gupta (minor) Vs. Rajiv Gupta
Dharnidhar Vs. State of UP and others
Dalbir Kaur and others Vs. State of Punjab
Dhari and others Vs. State of UP
Gangadhar Behra Vs. State of Orissa
Iqbal and another Vs. State of UP
Kirtan Bhuyyan Vs. State of Orissa
Kulvinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Kalegura Padma Rao and another Vs. State of AP
Lallu Manjhi and another Vs. State of Jharkhand
Mukesh and another Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and others
Nand Kumar Vs. State of Chhatisgarh
Rohtas Kumar Vs. State of Haryana
Nathuni Yadav and others Vs. State of Bihar and another
Ramesh Harijan Vs. State of UP
Shivraj Bapuray Jadhav and others Vs. State of Karnataka
S. Sudershan Reddy Vs. State of AP
Sadhu Saran Singh Vs. State of UP and others
State of Maharashtra Vs. Kashirao
Sunil Balkrishna Bhoir Vs. State of Maharashtra
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Thakkiyaram Reddy
The prosecution must establish a common object for unlawful assembly under Section 149 IPC; absence of motive and specific allegations can lead to acquittal.
Section 141 of IPC states that an “unlawful assembly” is an assembly of five or more persons, if their common object is to commit mischief, criminal trespass or any other offence.
Point of Law : Unlawful assembly – Common object - No doubt section 149 IPC is wide in its sweep but in fixing the membership of the unlawful assembly and in inferring the common object various circu....
The prosecution must prove the formation of an unlawful assembly and the shared common object beyond reasonable doubt, and essential witnesses must be produced to unfold the narrative.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on the established common object of the unlawful assembly, supported by credible witness testimonies and medical evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 149 IPC to determine the common object of the unlawful assembly and the vicarious liability of the accused, as well as t....
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.