Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(All) 1140

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAJIV GUPTA, SURENDRA SINGH-I, JJ.
State of Uttar Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Raja Ram and Others – Respondents
Government Appeal No. 1851 of 1983
Decided On : 05-08-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Kamal Krishna.
For the Respondent: S.P.S. Raghav.

The presumption of innocence remains paramount, and an acquittal can only be overturned if the trial court's findings are perverse or unsupported by evidence.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 323, 504, 302 - Government appeal against acquittal - The trial court acquitted the accused-respondents due to insufficient evidence and inconsistencies in witness testimonies - The prosecution's case relied heavily on circumstantial evidence, which was found lacking in reliability and coherence - The court emphasized the principle that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (Paras 54, 64, 92)

(B) Acquittal - The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only interfere if the trial court's findings are perverse or illegal - The trial court's detailed reasoning and assessment of evidence were upheld, affirming the acquittal of the accused-respondents. (Paras 91, 92)

Facts of the case:
The case involved the murder of Har Lal, with allegations against several accused stemming from a prior altercation involving a girl named Sheela - The prosecution's narrative was challenged by the defense, leading to a lengthy trial with multiple witnesses.

Findings of Court:
The trial court found that the prosecution failed to establish a reliable case against the accused-respondents, leading to their acquittal.

Issues: The main issues included the reliability of witness testimonies, the adequacy of circumstantial evidence, and the justification for the delay in lodging the FIR.

Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court reiterated that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, and any reasonable doubt must favor the accused - The trial court's findings were not found to be perverse or illegal.

Result: Government appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

RAJIV GUPTA, J.

1. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, learned AGA for the State, Sri Pankaj Kumar Tyagi assisted by Sri Akash Tyagi, learned counsel for the accused-respondents and perused the record.

2. Learned AGA has informed this Court that in the instant Government Appeal, Raja Ram, Bhagwan Singh and Sagar Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh has already passed away and the instant appeal on their behalf has already been abated vide order dated 15.5.2024 and now the appeal survives only qua appellant No. 3- Shri Chand.

3. The present Government Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 3.5.1983 passed by Special Judge, Bulandshahr in Sessions Trial No. 230 of 1980 (State Vs. Raja Ram and others), P.S. Gulaoti, District-Bulandshahr, by which the accused-respondents have been acquitted of all the charges framed against them.

4. The prosecution case as unraveled in the first information report lodged at the instance of P.W.-6 Surajveer is that the first formant is the permanent resident of village-Bhadaula, P.S. Modinagar, District-Ghaziabad, however for the last eight years they have been living at the house of one Badley, their maternal uncle resident of village-Barmadpur, P.S. Gulaoti, District-Bulandshahr, who was running a Wheat Flour Mill (Aata-Chakki). It is alleged that said Wheat Grinding Mill was run by Har Lal brother of the first informant. On 19.6.1978 at about 5 p.m., elder daughter of Shyami Gurjar reached at Wheat Grinding Mill for collecting her wheat flour. At the relevant time, Har Lal was present at the Wheat Grinding Mill and incidently, his shoulder rubbed against the shoulder of the girl, consequent to which, she felt bad and the girl after hurling abuses left for her house.

5. It is further alleged that the said factum was disclosed by his brother to Pyare Lal and Bachan Singh. At about 7.30 p.m. when his brother after taking his meal was sitting at the Wheat Grinding Mill, Bhagwan Singh, Rajaram and Sagar Singh reached there and started hurling abuses for the aforesaid conduct of Har Lal. On his refusal for the same, they took him away for clarifying the said incident of the matter. He alongwith his maternal uncle started following them, however they were stopped stating that he will return very soon after clarifying the matter, as such they did not accompany him.

6. It is further alleged that when his brother Har Lal did not return back at his Wheat Grinding Mill till 9.30 P.M., then he alongwith his maternal uncle Badley set out to know his whereabouts and searched for him towards village-Ustara, where near the canal contributory they saw Rajaram, Bhagwan Singh, Sagar Singh. Shri Chand son of Shyami alongwith 2-3 unknown persons coming from the field of Jalla. It is further alleged that they were carrying his brother in a hanging position towards the Wheat Grinding Mill Ustara. On their interception they started assaulting his maternal uncle Badley by lathi and also rushed towards him, however he alongwith his maternal uncle made his escape good. On account of fear they stayed the whole night in the Jungle and on the next morning reached the police station to lodge the report, however, found that all the accused assailants were present there, as such they dared not to enter the police station and on making query, it was revealed that they had killed his brother and had lodged a false report of loot.

7. It is further alleged that on that very day at about 6 p.m. he had sent a telegram addressed to S.P, Bulandshahr from Hapur. On the basis of said written report, a first information report is shown to have been registered on 22.6.1978 at 12.15 p.m., vide Case Crime No. 144A, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 302 IPC, P.S. Gulaoti, District-Bulandshahr in respect of an incident alleged to have taken place on 19.6.1978 at 7.30 p.m.

8. Perusal of the record of the instant case shows that prior to lodging of the aforesaid first information report another FIR had already been lodged by Mukhtiar Singh