2025 Supreme(All) 2240
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Rajiv Gupta, Harvir Singh, JJ.
Pankaj - Appellant
Vs.
State of U.P. - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1820 of 2015
Decided On : 22-05-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ajay Kumar Mishra,Arun Kumar Singh,Vivek Singh
For the Respondent: G.A.,Vivek Kumar Singh
The court emphasized the necessity for reliable eyewitness accounts in criminal convictions, highlighting the significance of corroborating evidence and the consequences of inconsistencies in witness testimonies.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 34 - Arms Act, 1959 - Section 25(4) - Conviction for murder - Appellant convicted for life imprisonment and fine, based on testimonies of witnesses claiming to have witnessed the incident - Court found inconsistencies and lack of corroborating evidence, leading to doubts about the reliability of the witnesses - Appeal allowed, conviction set aside. (Paras 115-120)
(B) Evidence - Testimony of witnesses - Court emphasized the necessity for reliable and corroborated eyewitness accounts, highlighting discrepancies in witness statements and the absence of key witnesses. (Paras 81-112)
JUDGMENT :
Rajiv Gupta, J.
1. Heard Shri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the accused-appellant, Shri A.N. Mulla and Shri Ashish Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the trial court record.
2. The instant criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 09.03.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 13, Meerut in Sessions Trial No. 418 of 2010 ( State Vs. Pankaj and Another ), arising out of Case Crime No. 432 of 2009, under Sections 302 IPC , Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut and Sessions Trial No.419 of 2010 (State Vs.Pankaj), arising out of Case Crime No. 476 of 2009, under Section 25/4 of Arms Act, Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut, by which, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 /34 IPC and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/- further the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 4/25 of Arms Act and awarded the sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulations. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
3. As per the prosecution case, first information report in the instant case has been lodged by one Jaiveer Singh, uncle of the deceased Parul vide written report dated 24.11.2009 (Ext. Ka-4), which was registered vide Case Crime No. 413 of 2009, under Sections 307 IPC , Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut at 08:15 p.m., carbon copy whereof has been drawn vide G.D. Report No. 42 at 20:15 p.m., which has been proved and marked as Ext. Ka-5 by Constable Clerk Ram Chandra (P.W.5) at the relevant date and time.
4. Briefly, the prosecution story, as stated in the first information report, is that on 24.11.2009 at about 07:15 p.m., Kumari Parul, daughter of his brother Harvir Singh after stepping out from the door of her house was giving breads to the dogs, when two unknown persons reached there and both of them stabbed Kumari Parul with a knife in her abdomen. After assaulting her, they immediately left the place of incident, which incident has been witnessed by some persons. His brother along with his nephew Rahul had taken Parul to the hospital at Meerut. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, a written report was scribed by the scribe Rajpal Singh, son of Ranjeet Singh, resident of Karnaval, Tehsil Sardhana, Meerut and thereafter it was lodged in Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut vide Case Crime No. 413 of 2009, under Section 307 IPC .
5. The said FIR was registered in the presence of S.I.Devendra Singh (P.W.7), who was entrusted with the investigation of the said case. He thereafter recorded the statement of the first informant and then visited the place of incident and collected blood stained earth and plain earth from the place of incident, kept it in a separate container, sealed it and thereafter prepared the recovery memo, which has been proved and marked as Ext. Ka-2.
6. Thereafter, P.W.7, the Investigating Officer had prepared the site plan, which has been proved and marked as Ext. Ka-7. On getting the information about the death of the victim Kumari Parul, the case was converted under Section 302 IPC , thereafter the Investigating Officer visited her house and had prepared the inquest report and thereafter prepared the other relevant documents namely photo-nash, challan-nash, letter to R.I., letter to C.M.O., sample seal and thereafter wrapped the dead body in a cloth and handed it over to the constable for taking it to the mortuary for post-mortem. The inquest report as well as the other documents have been proved and marked as Exts. Ka-8 to Ka-13. The Investigation of the case was then entrusted to P.W.8 Pramod Kumar Sharma.
7. An autopsy was conducted on the person of the deceased Parul on 25.11.2009 at 04:30 p.m. by Dr. D.K. Saxena (P.W.6). The Doctor has noted the following ante-mortem injuries on the person of the










