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

2026 Supreme(All) 24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
AVNISH SAXENA, J.
Ramphal and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1458 of 1984
Decided On : 03-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Kamta Prasad, Shashank Kumar, Vinod Kumar Yadav, Virendra Singh Parmar

Conviction for dacoity under Section 395 IPC cannot stand if fewer than five persons are charged, highlighting the importance of substantive evidence and adherence to legal definitions.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 395 and 397 - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 374 - Dacoity conviction of less than five accused challenged - Convicted appellants acquitted as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and after considering trial court's erroneous evaluation of evidence. (Paras 12, 28)

(B) Dacoity Definition - Section 391 IPC stipulates that dacoity is defined as an act committed by five or more persons; conviction for dacoity under Section 395 cannot be maintained if fewer than five persons are charged. (Paras 12, 14, 20)

(C) Evidence Appreciation - Proper evaluation of evidence is paramount; accused-appellant's acquittal due to procedural inconsistencies and non-production of key witnesses. (Paras 22, 24)

(D) Benefit of Doubt - The appellate court affirmed that if evidence indicates doubt about the prosecution's case, the accused should be given the benefit of doubt. (Paras 27)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for dacoity and related offences, resulting from a police intercept during a dacoity but their conviction hinged on inconsistent witness testimony and the requirement for a minimum number of accused to substantiate the charges.

Findings of Court:
The appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellants were acquitted as the prosecution could not definitively prove their guilt, revealing flaws in the trial process.

Issues: Whether convicts were properly charged for dacoity when fewer than five were involved; whether the trial court properly appreciated evidence; whether sufficient grounds existed for conviction under Section 397.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the trial court incorrectly evaluated evidence, highlighting the necessity for a minimum of five participants in dacoity cases, ultimately tilting the legal scales in favor of the accused.

Result: Appeals allowed; appellants acquitted.

Table of Content
1. factual context of the appeal and charges. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8)
2. arguments regarding procedural misconduct. (Para 9 , 10)
3. analysis of legal concerns surrounding convictions. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
4. definition of dacoity and its statutory requirements. (Para 14 , 15)
5. consideration of evidence and implications for conviction. (Para 20 , 21 , 28)
6. final decision to acquit appellants. (Para 29 , 30)

JUDGMENT :

AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Sri Mahesh Prasad Yadav, Sri Kamta Prasad, learned counsel appearing for appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present criminal appeal has been preferred by two appellants, namely, Ramphal S/o Sukh Ram and Dhuram S/o Baij Nath, under Section 374 Cr.P.C. as they have been found guilty for offence under Section 395 IPC for which both the accused were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years. The accused-appellant Ramphal is further found guilty for offence under Section 397 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. For the accused Ramphal, both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. This conviction and sentence has been recorded by the trial court (Special Sessions Judge, Jhansi) by judgment and sentence dated 24.04.1984 in Sessions Trial No. 43 of 1977 ( State Vs. Hindupat and others ), arose out of Case Crime No.10 of 1975 and Case Crime No.11 of 1975 for offences under Sections 395, 397, 307 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, respectively, Police Station Garotha, District Jhansi.

3. The prosecution case is such that a police party consisting HC Jayatram A.P., C.A.P. Nathuram, C.A.P. Thakur Prasad and Constable Ram Kishan, who were posted for dacoity guard duty at village Tharro, when got a tip off at 11:30 a.m. on 19.01.1975 from Hardass, a village watchman of village Para that 8 to 9 miscreants extorting the passersby near Pearghata at Jhansi. Believing the tip off, the police party has taken Kalka Singh Thakur and Harju Gadaria from village Tharro and also taken the police persons from out post Kakarbai, namely, H.C. 759 C.P. Krishan Pal, C 456 Ram Awdhar, C 507 Mahabir Singh C and 898 Brindavan. They also took Nepal Singh, whom they met in the way to the place of incident Pearghata. The police persons reached the place of incident and saw that 9 persons were extorting passersby. They were seen equipped with one rifle, two SBBL gun, two country made pistols, three axes and one lathi and were spotted making personal search of two persons namely, Lakhan Singh of village Dhanora and Baldev Prasad Khare, a forest guard. The police party intercepted, one of the miscreants has raised alarm that the police has arrived, on which the miscreants have challenged the police persons and cross-firing begun. After indiscriminate firing on each other, the firing was stopped from the side of accused and two of the accused, namely, Ramphal and Dhuram have surrendered. Rest accused had sprinted away. The incident is of 19th January,1975 occurred at 12:30 p.m. The F.I.R. was registered the next date on 20th January,1975, at 12:15 p.m.

4. The memo of arrest and recovery (Exhibit Ka-1) disclosed that the two accused-appellants, namely, Dhuram s/o Baij Nath and Ramphal s/o Sukh Ram have surrendered before the police party and in their disclosure statements, the name of seven other accused has been mentioned in the memo, they are Hindupat Lodhi, Ramratan, Moolchand Nai, Tijua Teli, Halkua Chamar, Sukhainya Chamar, Ajuddi Chamar, who were stated to be present at the place of incident committing dacoity. It is further disclosed in the memo that Nandram Yadav of village Goti had called them to commit dacoity. From the personal search of Ramphal, the country made pistol 12 bore, two live and five empty cartridges as well as the booty was recovered; whereas from the personal search of Dhuram, jewellery and watch as booty had been recovered.

5. During the investigation, the identification parade of four accused, namely, Ramratan, H

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