High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Vivek Kumar Birla, Jitendra Kumar Sinha, JJ.
Bala Shankar – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2695 of 1986
Decided On : 13-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction under section 304 part-ii/149 confirmed (Para 3 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. enmity led to violent altercation (Para 4 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. injured witnesses carry more credibility (Para 10 , 26) |
| 4. intent and nature of injury determine murder charges (Para 29 , 30) |
| 5. appeal partly allowed; sentences modified (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
JUDGMENT
Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.
1. The appeal stood abated in respect of appellant Nos. 2 and 5 namely Nand Lal and Bhagirathi vide order dated 14.05.2025. The appeal survives in respect of appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 namely Bala Shankar, Rajmani and Mangaru.
2. Heard Sri Deena Nath, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri S.S.R. Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The appellants have challenged their conviction under Section 302 /149, 323/149 and 324/149 I.P.C.. Further appellant No.1 Bala Shankar has been convicted under Section 148 I.P.C. and rest of the appellants have been convicted under Section 147 I.P.C. The appellants have been sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302 /149 I.P.C. Appellant No.1 Bala Shankar has been sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 148 I.P.C., whereas rest of the appellants have been sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 147 I.P.C. Appellant Bala Shankar has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 323 /149 I.P.C. and rest of the appellants have been sentenced six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 323 /149 I.P.C. Further all the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
4. Prosecution story in brief is that one Ram Pyare @ Babau Mishra gave a written report to the Police Station- Rampur, District- Jaunpur stating therein that on 21.06.1982 at about 02:00 P.M. Bala Shankar, Mangaru, Rajmani, Nand Lal and Bhagirathi armed with ‘ballam’ and ‘lathi’ (Bala Shankar was armed with ‘ballam’ and other were armed with ‘lathi’) came to his door and started abusing him. When he stopped them from abusing, Bhagirathi exhorted the other accused persons and on the said exhortation they attacked his brother Vidya Shankar and his mother Sohagin and their neighbour Adya Prasad Mishra by ‘lathi’ and ‘ballam’. When uproar was made, Murlidhar Mishra, Shambhunath Mishra, Anil Kumar Mishra reached there and intervened and saved them. It is further stated that Bala Shankar gave blows of ‘ballam’ to Vidya Shankar and Vidya Shankar had received many injuries. The informant has further stated that he reached the police station along with injured persons to lodge a report. On the basis of the above written report, the first information report was lodged under Sections 147 , 148, 323, 324 and 326 of the I.P.C. against Bala Shankar, Mangaru, Rajmani, Nand Lal and Bhagirathi. During medical treatment, Vidya Shankar died and case was converted into Section 304 I.P.C. After investigation the charge sheet was submitted under Sections 147 , 148, 323, 324, 326 and 304 of I.P.C. on 01.07.1982. The Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and committed the case to the court of sessions for trial. Trial stood transferred to the court of Special Judge/Additional Session Judge, Jaunpur. The then learned Addition Sessions Judge, Jaunpur framed charges under Section 147 , 302/149, 307/149 of the I.P.C. against appellants Mangaru, Rajmani, Nand Lal, Bhagirathi vide order dated 18.07.1983, whereas the appellant Bala Shankar has been charged under Sections 147 , 148, 302, 302/149, 307/149 I.P.C. vide order dated 18.07.1983.
5. The prosecution has examined Pyare Lal Mishra as PW-1. Adya Prasad as PW-2. Dr. Chandra Bhoosan Upaddhyay as PW-3. Dr. R.K. Singh as PW-4. Sri Vidya Dhar Tripathi (S.H.O.) as PW-5. Sri Purushottam Das Sharma as PW-6. Sri Jamwant Singh (Constable) as PW-7.
In documentary evidence, the prosecution has proved written report as Ext. Ka-1. Injury report of Adya Prasad as Ext. Ka-2. Injury report of Pyare Lal @ Babau as Ext. K
The court modified murder convictions under Section 302/149 to Section 304 Part-II/149 based on medical evidence attributing death to septicaemia from ante mortem injuries, highlighting the significa....
The credibility of witness testimonies in criminal trials requires careful scrutiny, particularly when they are related to victims, and the prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Related witness testimony can be credible in criminal proceedings, and minor discrepancies do not undermine the prosecution case if the core narrative remains intact.
The testimony of injured witnesses holds significant evidentiary value and can support a conviction for murder when corroborated by medical evidence, establishing intent beyond reasonable doubt.
The court affirmed that testimony from injured witnesses is highly credible, and minor inconsistencies do not undermine the prosecution's case if corroborated by medical evidence.
The court determined that the accused's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as the prosecution failed to prove premeditation or undue advantage during a sudden fight.
Witness testimony, particularly that of injured victims, holds significant weight in criminal cases, affirming convictions despite claims of investigative defects or witness bias.
The court clarified that common intention under Section 34 IPC requires clear evidence of prearranged plans, leading to the first accused's conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304 while ac....
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.