Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(All) 1109

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, HON'BLE SURENDRA SINGH-I, JJ.
State of Uttar Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Rajdeo Singh And Others – Respondents
Government Appeal No. 3087 of 1986
Decided On : 29-07-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : A.G.A., G.D. Mekavi.
For the Respondents: Uttar Kumar Goswami, Pulak Ganguly, Ravi Bhushan Singh, Sharda Chauhan, Praveen Kumar Singh.

The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; acquittal upheld due to unreliable eyewitness testimony and lack of corroborative evidence.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 149, 395, 436, 323, 325, 506, 302 - Government appeal against acquittal - Accused acquitted of all charges by trial court - Prosecution failed to prove case beyond reasonable doubt - Eyewitnesses' testimonies found unreliable due to inconsistencies and lack of corroboration - Trial court's findings upheld. (Paras 50, 101, 106)

(B) Acquittal - Standard of proof - In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only interfere if the trial court's findings are perverse or illegal. (Paras 102, 106)

Facts of the case:
The case arose from an incident where Buddhi Ram was allegedly assaulted and later died from his injuries. The accused were acquitted due to insufficient evidence. (Paras 2, 50)

Findings of Court:
The trial court found that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, leading to their acquittal. (Paras 50, 101)

Issues: The main issues included the reliability of eyewitness testimonies and whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 50, 101)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the prosecution's failure to provide corroborative evidence and the presence of inconsistencies in witness statements warranted the trial court's acquittal of the accused. (Paras 50, 101)

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Hon’ble Rajiv Gupta, J.)

1. Heard Shri Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, learned AGA assisted by Shri Virendra Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the State/ appellant, Shri Pulak Ganguly, learned counsel assisted by Shri Ravi Bhushan Singh, learned counsel for the accused-respondents and perused the record.

2. This government appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 18.08.1986 passed by Sessions Judge, Ghazipur in Sessions Trial No. 175 of 1986 (State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Raj Deo Singh and 4 Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 79 of 1985, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 395, 436, 323, 325, 506 IPC, Police Station Sadat, District Ghazipur, by which, the accused-respondents have been acquitted of all the charges framed against them.

3. During the pendency of the said government appeal, accused-respondent nos. 3 and 4 Raj Narain Singh and Ram Ashrey Singh has already passed away and as such, the instant government appeal qua accused-respondent nos. 3 and 4 Raj Narain Singh and Ram Ashrey Singh has been abated vide order dated 19.04.2018 and now, it survives only for accused-respondent nos. 1, 2 and 5, Raj Deo Singh, Vikrama Singh and Radhey Shyam Singh.

4. The prosecution story as unfurled in the FIR is that on the day of incident at about 9:30 AM, Buddhi Ram, father of the first informant was going towards Ghazipur and when, he reached near the Bawli, accused persons Raj Deo, Vikrama, Raj Narain, Ram Ashrey and Radhey Shyam suddenly emerged from the willow. Witnessing them, Buddhi Ram went into the field of Shiv Pujan, Raj Deo then caught hold of him and immediately thereafter, Vikrama, Raj Narain, Ram Ashrey and Radhey Shyam also reached there. Radhey Shyam and Ram Ashrey fired a shot.

5. The accused persons thereafter started assaulting Buddhi Ram with lathi-danda and twisted his hands and legs causing fracture injuries. Vikrama and Raj Narain gave 50 blows on the knees of Buddhi Ram and twisted his legs whereas Radhey Shyam assaulted him by kicks and fists. On alarm being raised by Buddhi Ram, first informant and number of other villagers from Harijan Basti reached at the place of incident. The accused persons chased them armed with guns. After assaulting Buddhi Ram, accused Vikrama snatched his two passbooks and a wrist watch.

6. It is further alleged that accused persons reached at the house of Buddhi Ram and snatched the ornaments of inmates of house and thereafter, set his house on fire. Consequent to which, several articles of his house were burnt. Thereafter, the inmates of the house ran away from there. The accused persons are alleged to have chased Deo Nath, elder son of Buddhi Ram and one Lacchan, with their guns, however, they made their escape good.

7. According to the prosecution own case, it is further stated that PW-1 Shiv Prasad, after witnessing the incident of assault on his father in the field of Shiv Pujan, straight away went to the Police Outpost Bahariyabad, where he met two police Constable and one Head Constable and brought them to his home, where he was informed by his sister-in-law that his father has been taken away to the Police Station, as such, he alone left for the Police Station, however, on the way near the temple, met his father lying on a cot, who told him that when he reached in the field of Shiv Pujan, then the assailants emerged from the willow and started assaulting him.

8. It is further stated that PW-1 scribed the first information report near the temple and thereafter, injured Buddhi Ram is said to have been taken to the Police Station Sadat, where written report (Exhibit Ka-1) was handed over to the Moharrir by Shiv Prasad (PW-1), on the basis of which, chik first information report (Exhibit Ka-2) was registered at Police Station Sadat vide Case Crime No. 79 of 1985, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 395, 436, 323, 325, 506 IPC, the corresponding G.D. Entry of which was also drawn vide G.D. Report No. 17 at 11:45 hours, which has been proved and marked as Exhibit Ka