Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAJIV GUPTA, MOHD. AZHAR HUSAIN IDRISI, JJ.
Usman – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. –Respondent
Jail Appeal No.4480 of 2016
Decided on : 14-03-2024
Criminal Appeal - Murder - Section 302 IPC - [Section 302 IPC] - The court confirmed the conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution successfully established the presence of the appellant at the time and place of the incident, and the appellant failed to offer any reasonable explanation for the crime, shifting the burden of proof to him under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. The testimony of a child witness was found reliable and corroborated by medical evidence, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and confirmation of the conviction and sentence.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife. The prosecution established the appellant's presence at the time and place of the incident, and the appellant failed to offer any reasonable explanation for the crime.
Finding of the Court:
The court confirmed the conviction and sentence of the appellant, as the prosecution successfully established the case beyond reasonable doubt. The testimony of a child witness was found reliable and corroborated by medical evidence.
Issues: Presence of the appellant at the time and place of the incident, reliability of the child witness testimony, burden of proof under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The prosecution successfully established the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the burden of proof shifted to the appellant under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. The testimony of the child witness was found reliable and corroborated by medical evidence.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant were confirmed. The appellant was directed to serve out the sentence imposed by the trial court.
JUDGMENT :
Rajiv Gupta, J.
1. Heard Shri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant, Shri J.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. This instant jail appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30.11.2015 passed by District and Sessions Judge, Bijnor, in Sessions Trial No.221 of 2014 (State Vs. Usman), arising out of Case Crime No. 59 of 2014, under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station Syohara, District Bijnor, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.20,000/-with default stipulation.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the prosecution story, as mentioned in the FIR, is that Shahana, sister of the first informant Mohd. Hanif (P.W. 1) was married about 12 years back to the appellant Usman, resident of mohalla Aladinpur, Police Station Syohara. Usman used to suspect the character of his wife and very often used to hurl abuses and beat her in a drunken state. It is further stated that every effort was made to counsel him by his family members, but to no avail. Yesterday i.e. on 29.01.2014, at about 08.00 p.m. in the evening, Shahana had called him over phone and informed that her husband Usman is quarreling with her, beating her and threatening to kill her, he, however, pacified his sister and asked her not to quarrel and assured that he will reach by tomorrow to counsel Usman. It is further stated that on 30.01.2014, he along with his brother Mohd. Islam and Akbar Ali reached his sister's house in village Aladinpur and found her dead body lying on a cot having injuries on her neck and face. A rope was found lying near the cot. It is further stated that last night Shahana was done to death with the help of rope by strangulating her.
4. On the basis of a written report (Ext. Ka-1), an FIR was registered vide Case Crime No.59 of 2014, under Section 302 IPC in Police Station Syohara, District Bijnor at 08.30 a.m. Carbon copy whereof was drawn vide G.D. Report No.19 at 08.30 a.m. on 30.01.2014.
5. The investigation of the said case was entrusted to the Station Officer, who after copying out the chik FIR and G.D. in the Case Diary, recorded the statement of Head Moharrir and thereafter, recorded the statement of the first informant Hanif, Adnan, son of the deceased and Fatima, sister of the deceased and thereafter on the pointing out of the first informant prepared the site plan, which has been proved and marked as Ext. Ka-3.
6. A plastic rope lying near the cot was also taken in possession and a recovery memo was prepared for the same, which has been proved and marked as Ext. Ka-4. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer instructed S.I. Rajendra Singh, who accompanied him to the place of incident to conduct the inquest. S.I. Rajendra Singh conducted the inquest and prepared the Inquest Memo and at the same time prepared all other relevant documents namely Form-13, photo-lash, challanlash, letter to C.M.O., letter to R.I., sample seal, which has been proved and marked as Ext. Ka-9 to Ka-14 and thereafter sent the body of the deceased to the mortuary.
7. An autopsy was conducted by Dr. F.C. Verma on the person of the deceased Shahana in District Hopspital, Bijnor on 31.01.2014 and in the post-mortem report, the Doctor has noted two ante-mortem injuries, which are as under:-
(ii) Abrasion 12 cm x 2 cm below the mouth present on both sides of mandible.
8. In internal examination of the corps, trachea was found congested and ecchymosis was present. Both the lungs were congested. Right chamber of heart was full, whereas the left chamber was empty. Stomach was empty. Gall bladder was full. Spleen, liver and kidneys were found congested. The Doctor has noted the cause of death to be asphyxia due to antemortem strangulation.
9. On 31.01.2014 itself, the appellant Usman is said to have been arrested and h
The burden of proof under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act shifts to the accused if the prosecution establishes the facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding the existence ....
The court upheld the conviction under IPC Section 302, emphasizing that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain, proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt without the accused providing an adeq....
The burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act lies with the accused to provide a convincing explanation for circumstances within their knowledge, and the court may draw an adverse inferen....
Circumstantial evidence must be fully established beyond reasonable doubt, with the burden shifting to the accused after the prosecution proves its case.
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence and the application of Section 106 of the Evidence Act, emphasizing the accused's failure to provide an alibi.
The judgment establishes the principle that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The application of Section 106 of t....
(1) Child witness – Evidence of a child witness for all purposes is deemed to be on same footing as any other witness as long child is found to be competent to testify.(2) Murder of wife and disappea....
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
