Back
2024 Supreme(All) 2526
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Siddhartha Varma, Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, JJ.
Balloo And Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 2709 of 1983
Decided On : 08-11-2024
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Murder
Act Referred
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE: S.313
Headnote
(B) Eyewitness Testimony - Reliability of witness - Court highlighted the need for credible testimony, finding major inconsistencies in the eyewitness account leading to doubt about the truth of the testimony and credibility of the witness. (Paras 16-19)
Facts of the case:
The prosecution claimed the murder of Girdhari by the appellants, who allegedly were influenced by the belief that Girdhari was responsible for their father's death. The first informant, PW-4, provided eyewitness testimony but displayed inconsistencies regarding the incident's timeline and location, leading to claims of false implication.
Findings of Court:
The testimony of the first informant was not credible, displaying inconsistencies that significantly undermined the prosecution's case and raised doubts about the incident's actual occurrences. The court determined that the accused was wrongfully implicated based on unreliable testimony.
Issues: The main issues revolved around discrepancies in eyewitness accounts, the credibility of the testimonies, and whether the prosecution had established the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that inconsistencies in the eyewitness's testimony, alongside the dubious nature of the first information report, ultimately led to a conclusion that the burden of proof was not satisfied. Therefore, the accused could not be convicted based on such fallible evidence.
Result: Appeal allowed and the accused acquitted.
For the Appellant : V.C. Tewari, Diwakar Shukla, Rajiv Lochan Shukla
For the Respondent: A.G.A.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. incident details and investigation timeline. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. eyewitness testimony and credibility. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. investigative process and findings. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. trial outcome and convictions. (Para 12) |
| 5. defendant appeals and arguments against conviction. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. judgment reversal and acquittal of accused. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. court orders and completion of proceedings. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 27.10.1983 and the sentence and conviction dated 29.10.1983 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur.
2. Upon an alleged incident having taken place on 15.01.1981 at 8.00 a.m., the first information report in this regard was lodged at 1.30 p.m.. Thereafter, police got into action and started the investigation. The police took into its possession the plain soil and the soil laden with blood and prepared a memo, which was exhibited as Ex. Ka-12. Similarly, Spade (Farsa) was also taken into custody, the memo of which was prepared as Ex.Ka-13. Similarly, a Lathi of Baans was also taken into custody and a memo of which was prepared as Ex. Ka-14. Thereafter the Panchayatnama of the deceased was done. Along with the Panchayatnama and the first information report, which was lodged, the body was sent for post mortem on 16.01.1981. The dead body reached the mortuary at 3.45 p.m. and the post mortem thereafter was conducted on 17.01.1981 at 2.00 p.m. The police thereafter concluded its investigation and submitted its report. Upon the receipt of the report, the court of Sessions Judge, Fatehpur had framed the charges against the appellants, namely, Balloo, Pramod, Raja Babu and Anil on 28.04.1983 under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. When the charges were denied, trial had commenced, which when ended in a conviction of the accused, the instant appeal was filed.
3. As per the First Information Report, the case of the first informant was that the uncle of the first informant, namely, Girdhari had gone to the eastern side of the village near the canal (Bamba Hall) for the purpose of irrigating his agricultural fields and while he was irrigating the fields, the appellant Balloo of the very same village, of which the first informant was came out from the side of the canal and called the uncle of the first informant towards the canal. Upon being so called the uncle of the first informant went up to Balloo and when the talks were over and the uncle was returning, it is the case of the first informant, from under the canal, where Lahi was growing Raja Babu, Anil and Pramod, the brothers of Balloo came out and they exhorted Balloo to kill his uncle-Girdhari as he was instrumental in getting the father of the appellants killed by Chandrapal etc.
4. It is stated in the first information report that they had exhorted each other to kill the uncle of the first informant Girdhari and to take the required revenge. It has further been stated that when the uncle upon being openly threatened by these accused persons started running towards the first informant, then Balloo, who was having a countrymade pistol fired upon the deceased. At that point of time Raja Babu also took out his countrymade pistol and fired upon the uncle of the first informant. Thereafter, the uncle of the first informant fell down. Not satisfied with just the firing, Pramod one of the accused persons also attacked the uncle with his Spade. It is still further the case of the first informant that when the first informant tried to save his uncle, he was also beaten by Anil with his Lathi. After the incident had occurred, the first informant raised a hue and cry. He has stated in the first information report that when the countrymade pistol was fired then Shivraj son of Puran, Kandhai son of Balkishan, Sukhdev son of Sundar and Chunnu Pasi came to the spot. He has stated that many others, who were present there to answer the call of nature near
