IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Arvind Singh Sangwan, Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi, JJ.
Asif Thakur And Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
CAPITAL CASES No. - 10 of 2022, CAPITAL CASES No. - 11 of 2022, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3582 of 2022
Decided On : 05-09-2024
(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 149, 120B, 147, 148 - Arms Act - Section 25 - Death sentence awarded to appellants for murder of Naushe and Chanda - Conviction upheld but death penalty converted to life imprisonment for 20 years due to lack of aggravating circumstances and potential for rehabilitation. (Paras 58-72)
(B) Criminal Procedure - Delay in FIR registration - Delay explained as procedural but raises questions on credibility of eyewitnesses. (Paras 25-34)
(C) Evidence - Testimony of eyewitnesses - Their relationship to deceased does not disqualify them as witnesses; minor contradictions do not undermine their credibility. (Paras 56-72)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the murder of two individuals, Naushe and Chanda, with the trial court awarding death sentences based on eyewitness accounts and circumstantial evidence. The case involved complex issues of witness credibility and procedural delays in FIR registration.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction but found that the death penalty was not warranted, converting it to life imprisonment based on mitigating factors.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of eyewitnesses, the delay in FIR registration, and the appropriateness of the death penalty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the evidence supported conviction, the absence of aggravating circumstances necessitated a commutation of the death sentence to life imprisonment.
Result: Appeals partly allowed; death penalty converted to life imprisonment.
JUDGMENT :
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J.
1. Reference No. 7 of 2022 has been made by the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Aligarh for confirmation of death sentence awarded to appellants, Ahsan, Asif Thakur, Bhoora, Kafeel and Wakeel. The appellants have also filed Jail Appeals i.e. Capital Case Nos. 10 of 2022 and 11 of 2022 challenging the judgment of conviction dated 22.4.2022, holding the appellants guilty of offence under Sections 302 read with Section 149 and 120B, 147 and 148 of IPC, holding appellants Bhoora, Kafeel and Wakeel under Section 25 of the Arms Act and also holding accused-Gayasuddin guilty of offence under Section 302 read with Section 120B of IPC in Sessions Trial Nos.44 of 2016 (State Vs. Ahsan and four others) arising out of Case Crime No.362 of 2015), in Sessions Trial No.51 of 2016 (State Vs. Bhoora) arising out of Case Crime No.377 of 2015, in Sessions Trial No.41 of 2016 (State Vs. Kafeel) arising out of Case Crime No.379 of 2015, in Sessions Trial No. 36 of 2016 (State Vs. Wakeel) arising out of Case Crime No.378 of 2015 and Sessions Trial Nos. 586 of 2016 (State vs. Gayasuddin) arsing out of Case Crime No. 362 of 2015 and the order of sentence dated 25.4.2022 vide which, the appellants were awarded death sentence, to be hanged till death under Section 302 read with Section 149 and Section 120(B) of IPC with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo further additional imprisonment for one year each; under Section 147 of IPC, the appellants were awarded one year simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000/-each and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo further additional simple imprisonment for six month each; under Section 148 of IPC, the appellants were awarded three years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo further additional simple imprisonment for six months; under Section 25 of Arms Act, the appellants, namely, Kafeel, Wakeel and Bhoora were awarded three years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000/-each and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo further additional simple imprisonment for six months and accused-Gayasuddin who has filed Criminal Appeal No. 3582 of 2022 was awarded life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 120B of IPC with fine of Rs.1000/- and in case of default in payment of fine, further to undergo imprisonment for six months. All the sentences were to run concurrently.
2. The Reference and Appeal were admitted. The Trial Court’s record is received and paper books are ready.
3. Heard Sri Araf Khan, learned counsel for appellants in Capital Case No.10 of 2022 and Sri B.A. Khan, learned counsel for appellant in Capital Case No.11 of 2022, Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel for appellant in Criminal Appeal No.3582 of 2022 and the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
4. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties, the entire evidence is re-scrutinized and re-appreciated.
5. As per the prosecution, on 25.07.2015, informant- Raja gave a complaint, Ex.Ka.1 to the police which read as under:
6. On receiving the complaint, the police registered the chik FIR, Ex.Ka.2 and started the investigation. The Panchayatnama was prepared in which the opinion of Panches read as under:
7. During further investigation, the post-mortem of the deceased was got conducted, the accused were arrested, the weapons of offence were recovered and the incriminating recoveries were sent to FSL, Agra by the Investigating Officer who also recorded the statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he submitted the charge-sheet before the trial court. Later on, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where the charges were framed against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 read with Section 120-B I.P.C. for committing the murder of Naushe and Cha
Manoj Kumar Soni Vs. State of MP; 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 703
The court upheld the conviction for murder but commuted the death penalty to life imprisonment due to lack of aggravating circumstances and potential for rehabilitation.
The court upheld the conviction for murder but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for extreme caution in imposing capital punishment.
Conviction for murder by unlawful assembly sustainable on reliable sole eyewitness to killing, corroborated by medical evidence and abduction witnesses, despite FIR delay, witness non-examination, an....
The court reaffirmed that consistent eyewitness testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient to establish guilt in murder cases under IPC Sections 147, 149, and 302.
As the medical evidence does not support the manner of assault on the victim. It also lends support to the defence case, such a wound could not be possible looking to the position of the victim & per....
Murder – When there is ample unimpeachable ocular evidence and same has been corroborated by medical evidence, non-recovery of weapon does not affect persecution case.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on credible evidence, including witness testimony and medical findings, even absent direct physical evidence like weapon recovery.
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.