HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, JJ.
Sobran Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P – Respondent
JAIL APPEAL No. - 1377 of 2012
Decided On : 30-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction for murder and robbery. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. allegations of false implication and inconsistencies. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. arguments against established motive and mens rea. (Para 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. evaluating witnesses and evidentiary weight. (Para 15 , 16 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. distinction between murder and culpable homicide. (Para 36 , 60 , 69) |
| 6. modification of sentence while affirming conviction. (Para 75 , 76 , 77) |
JUDGMENT :
Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, J.
1. The present Jail Appeal has been preferred by the appellant/ accused- Sobran Lal against the common judgment and order dated 04.08.2012 passed by the Special/Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in (i) Sessions Trial No. 854 of 2008 arising out of Crime No. 201 of 2008 (State V/s Hari Om alias Bantu and Another), whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced for the substantive offences under Section 302 I.P.C. for the punishment of life imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and fine stipulation, under Section 307 I.P.C. for 10 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and fine stipulation, under Section 393 I.P.C. for 07 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 3,000/- and fine stipulation, and (ii) Sessions Trial No. 855 of 2008 arising out of Crime No. 203 of 2008 (State V/s Sobran Lal), under Section 3/25 Arms Act for 03 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and fine stipulation. All sentences were directed to run concurrently in view of Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as to ‘Cr.P.C.’).
CASE OF THE PROSECUTION
2. The case of the prosecution as elaborated by the learned Trial Court in the impugned judgment is briefly encapsulated as herein under:
2.1 As per the version of the complainant- Neeraj Kumar Soni (P.W.-1), on the day of the incident i.e. on 29.02.2008 at 5.30 PM, when he was sitting at his jewellery shop situated on Gulauli Road, two persons riding a motorcycle attempted to rob his elder brother-Manoj Soni and tried to snatch the bag in which his brother was carrying jewellery and cash while returning home.
2.2 On raising alarm, local residents of the neighborhood including Saur Alam (P.W.-3), Narendra Kumar Verma (P.W.-4), Surendra Chandra Gupta, Sanjay Mishra etc. gathered at the spot and challenged the miscreants. Thereupon, one of the miscreants took out a pistol from his pant and fired at his elder brother- Manoj Soni with intent to kill, which hit his brother on the left side of his body, causing a fatal gunshot injury. When the informant/complainant tried to save his brother and intervened, the the other miscreant assaulted him with a knife several times with the intent to kill him, causing injury to his shoulder and hands.
2.3 Somehow, with the assistance of the neighborhood, both the miscreants were apprehended at the spot with a pistol, live cartridge, empty cartridge, and a knife along with their motorcycle bearing number UP25U3803, chassis No. DSVBME34762.
2.4 On being questioned, one of the aforesaid miscreants told his name as Hari Om alias Bantu, son of Shriram Sharma, resident of Nai Basti, infront of Power House, G.T Road, Kasba and Police Station Fatehganj East and the other told his name as Sobran Lal Yadav (Appellant), son of Omkar Yadav, resident of Saidpur Manjha, Police Station Fatehganj East, District Bareilly.
2.5 Subsequently, his injured brother- Manoj Soni was taken to the Government Hospital at Mohammadi by the neighbours and his younger brother Pankaj Soni (P.W.-2), where he was declared dead. The said incident became a cause of terror in the entire neighborhood of Mohammadi, resulting in panic and closure of shops and the entire market in the locality, causing disturbance of public order.
2.6 Based on the aforesaid written information (Exhibit-Ka-1) given by the complainant- Neeraj Kumar Soni (P.W.-1) an F.I.R No. 62/2008 (Exhibit Ka-14) under Section 393, 302, 307 I.P.C. was lodged on 29.02.2008 at 18:15 PM relat
Saudan Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Atul Thakur v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Kusha Laxman Waghmare Vs. State of Maharashtra
Jagroop Singh V/s State of Haryana
Shiva Kumar @ Shiva @ Shivamurthy v. State of Karnataka
Md. Rojali Ali v. The State of Assam
Bipin Kumar Mondal v. State of West Bengal
Jitendra Pal Vs State of Uttar Pradesh
Rampal Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
The conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. was upheld based on consistent eyewitness testimonies and established intent, with the sentence modified to 18 years' rigorous imprisonment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between 'culpable homicide amounting to murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under Section 304 of the Indian Pen....
The court modified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304(ii) IPC, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the presence o....
Conviction modified from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to inconsistencies in witness testimonies and insufficient evidence linking the accused to the weapon used in the crim....
Point of Law; It is well settled by plethora of judicial pronouncements by this Court that suspicion, however strong cannot take the place of proof. An accused is presumed to be innocent unless prove....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the evidence of eyewitnesses, the injured witness, and the medical evidence played a crucial role in establishing the guilt of the accused bey....
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.