SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(All) 2781

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD 
Vivek Kumar Birla, Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi, JJ. 
Shambu And Another – Appellants
Versus
State – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 1507 of 1983
Decided On : 28-05-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Pawan Shukla (A.C.), Ayank Mishra, Maha Prasad, Tanmay Verma, Vivek Kumar Srivastava
For the Respondent: A.G.A.

Witness testimony from relatives can be credible if corroborated; delay in FIR is not fatal if satisfactorily explained.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 307 - Conviction for murder and attempt to murder - Appellants convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for attempt to murder - Prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that appellants attacked the deceased and attempted to kill witnesses - Evidence of eye-witnesses corroborated by medical testimony - Delay in lodging FIR explained - No substantial grounds for appeal found. (Paras 1-74)

(B) Evidence - Testimony of related witnesses - Not automatically disqualified - Their evidence can be credible if corroborated and consistent with circumstances. (Paras 32-40)

(C) Criminal Procedure - Delay in lodging FIR - Not fatal if satisfactorily explained - Courts have discretion to accept delayed FIR depending on facts. (Paras 28-30)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the murder of Thakurdeen and attempted murder of his father and another witness on 26.11.1982. The incident was motivated by a land dispute. The FIR was lodged promptly after the incident.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, establishing the guilt of the appellants.

Issues: The main issues included the credibility of witness testimonies, the delay in lodging the FIR, and the motive behind the crime.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the testimony of related witnesses is not inherently unreliable and can be accepted if consistent and corroborated. The delay in lodging the FIR was justified, and the evidence presented was sufficient to uphold the conviction.

Result: Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld.

JUDGMENT :

Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi, J.

1. (i).Office report dated 03.08.1983 demonstrates that Trial Court Record has been received way back in the year 1983 and the accused appellants were released on bail vide order dated 09.06.1983. The paper books were also prepared pursuant to the order dated 15.07.2019. Order sheet transpires that the learned counsel for the accused appellants avoided to appear before the Court to argue the appeal, despite consistent orders. In these pressing and compelling circumstances non-bailable warrants were issued against the accused appellants on 15.07.2019, which were duly executed upon the accused appellants, the accused appellants appeared in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai and were released on bail with undertaking that they would appear before this court on the date fixed. A perusal of the order sheet further evinces that the appeal was listed on 16.03.2022 and 31.08.2022 for hearing but no one appeared on behalf of appellants to advance arguments. The appeal was again listed on 31.01.2024 for hearing. On that date, learned counsel for the accused appellants appeared and made a request for being adjourned. The appeal was again listed for hearing on 12.07.2024, but on account of call of strike by members of Bar, hearing could not be done. Again the appeal was directed to be listed on 25.07.2024 and in the meantime notices were served upon the accused appellants personally which is evident vide letter dated 5.6.2024 sent by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai and the office report dated 3.7.2024. Eventually, the appeal was listed on 5.11.2024. On that date, despite repeated calls, none appeared on behalf of accused appellants to press the appeal. Thus the record demonstrate that the counsel for the accused appellants as well as accused themselves employed all gadget to oscillate the appeal sine die, without seeing day light. The present appeal being of the year 1983 has been swinging years together on the dilatory and stalling tactics adopted by the counsels as well as the accused appellants themselves.

(ii).In view of the above, we are of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served to keep the present appeal swinging any more accommodating counsel for the appellants to advance argument on three dates. The Court is under bounden obligation to proceed with the matter and decide it after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, consequently, Sri Pawan Shukla, Advocate was appointed as Amicus Curiae to argue the appeal on behalf of accused appellants.

2.The instant appeal has been instituted on behalf of appellants against the judgment and order dated 21.5.1983 passed by the learned Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge Jalaun at Orai in Sessions Trial No. 16 of 1983 (State versus Shambhu and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 292 of 1982 under sections 302/307 IPC Police Station Kadaura, District Jalaun whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence punishable under sections 302 I.P.C. and were also directed to serve out five years rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under section 307 IPC with fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulations. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3.(i).Succinctly, the prosecution case, as divulged in First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) and other undisputed facts and circumstances, is that on 26.11.1982 at about 7.30 a.m. Informant Ghanjua S/o Matain, R/o- village Kahata, within circle of Police Station Ata, District Jalaun, orally informed to the P.S. Kadaura, about the incident occurred on 26.11.1982 at about 07.30 a.m. He informed that the accused appellants are originally residents of village Kahata, within circle of Police Station Ata, but since last few years they have started living in village Kanakhera, where the incident took place. In village Kanakhera the informant Ghanjua s/o Matain and his n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top