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) 3351

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Sangeeta Chandra, Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, JJ.
Jaimangal Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 548 of 2002
Decided On : 08-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : S.S.Yadav, Abhineet Jaiswal

Extra-judicial confessions are weak evidence requiring corroboration and should be credible; reliance on insufficient evidence led to the appellant's acquittal.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - Conviction for murder based on circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confession - The Appellant challenged the trial court's judgment convicting him for murder; the conviction was based on insufficient evidence and unacceptable contradictions in witness testimonies, particularly regarding extra-judicial confessions. (Paras 4, 9, 24, 42)

(B) Extra-judicial Confession - The court reiterated it is a weak type of evidence, requiring corroboration and should inspire confidence, particularly where circumstances surrounding the confession are suspicious. (Paras 28, 30, 39)

Facts of the case:
The informant discovered the body of the deceased, on investigation found the appellant fleeing nearby. Appellant confessed to the informant and was apprehended; the crime involved brutal head injuries sustained by the deceased, with a weapon linked to the appellant. (Paras 2, 6, 9, 10)

Findings of Court:
The trial court's reliance on extra-judicial confession and circumstantial evidence was deemed insufficient without supporting evidence, resulting in conviction being overturned. (Paras 38, 41, 42)

Issues: The main issues involved the credibility of the extra-judicial confession and the reliability of circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution. (Paras 30, 40)

Ratio Decidendi: The Appellate Court held that the evidence supporting the confession lacked reliability, significant contradictions in witness statements were present, and the medical evidence contradicted the prosecution case. (Paras 36, 42)

Result: Appeal allowed, conviction set aside, and appellant acquitted of all charges.

Table of Content
1. appeal against conviction details (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. investigation and evidence collection (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. trial court proceedings overview (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. appellant's arguments against conviction (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. prosecution's reliance on evidence (Para 21 , 22 , 24 , 25)
6. inconsistencies in testimonies (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
7. problems with extra-judicial confession and medical evidence (Para 34 , 35 , 37 , 39 , 40)
8. final judgment and acquittal (Para 42 , 43 , 44)

JUDGMENT :

Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.

1. Heard Shri Abhineet Jaiswal, learned Amicus for the appellant as well as Smt. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record.

2. This criminal appeal has been preferred by appellant-Jaimangal Yadav under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dated 8.03.2002 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Gonda in Session Trial No. 272/96 ( State Vs. Jaymangal Yadav ) arising out of Case Crime No. 154 of 1996, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Gonda, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and has been sentenced with rigorous life imprisonment, and fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of fine to further undergo for three months rigorous imprisonment.

3. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the instant appeal are that the informant, namely, Bhagwan Prasad has lodged a First Information Report at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda alleging that he is a resident of Karnailganj, Gonda and is having his Coal Depot at Faizabad by-pass in the vicinity of village Budhai Purwa in the name of Saket Coal Traders where deceased Bhagwati Prasad Tiwari was working as clerk and appellant Jaimangal Yadav was employed as Chaukidar pertaining to the incident occurred on 29.2.1996 at about 6.30 a.m.

4. It is further stated that on 29.2.96 he along with Shiv Shankar Tiwari and Shiv Bhagwan, after attending a B.D.C. Meeting, came to his Coal Depot and found his clerk Bhagwati Prasad Tiwari dead as he has been assaulted brutally on his head and thereafter he launched a search for appellant Jaimangal Yadav and he was found in the 'Arhar Field' situated nearby and after seeing the informant and his associates he started fleeing but was overpowered and apprehended and thereafter he confessed his guilt in terms that the deceased had levelled false allegation of theft against him and had not paid him his dues, so today at about 6.00 a.m. he assaulted the deceased with 'sabbal' on his head whereby he died and hid himself in the Arhar Field. It is also stated by the informant that he has tied the appellant with a rope at his coal depot and has come to lodge the FIR.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid written information an FIR in case Crime No. 154/1996 under Section 302 IPC was registered at Kotwali Nagar, Gonda and the investigation was entrusted to S.S.I. Shri Deepchand Tiwari.

6. The Investigating Officer arrived at the scene of the crime and prepared the inquest report and took the appellant in custody. Appellant while in the custody of police confessed his guilt before the Investigating Officer and there after on his pointing out a blood stained 'Sabbal' was recovered from the heap of coal situated nearby.

7. The Investigating Officer after completion of necessary paper work sent the dead body of the deceased for postmortem and the postmortem of the deceased was conducted by the Dr. C.M.R. Singh on 1.3.1996 at 4.05 P.M. The age of the deceased was found about 35 years. The rigor mortis was present in his whole body and following injuries were noted on his person:-

(i) Lacerated wound 3c.m. x 0.5c.m. Skull cavity deep, on left side of forehead 1.5 c.m. above left eye brow.

(ii) Lacerated wound 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. x skull cavity deep on the left forehead just above left eye brow.

(iii) Lacerated wound 4.5 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. x skull cavity deep on left side of head, 1.5 c.m. above injury no.2.

(iv) Incised wound 2 c.m. x 0.5 c

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