Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, JJ.
Jagdamba Harijan - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 1841 of 2018
Decided On : 12-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against acid attack murder conviction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellant threw acid on mother and sister-in-law. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. trial convicted appellant; appeal preferred. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. challenges fir delay, witnesses, identity, causation. (Para 8) |
| 5. acid attacks are cruel gender-based violence. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. timeline confirms acid burns caused deaths. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. septic shock from burns, not treatment failure. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 8. witness identified appellant despite fir variances. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 9. fir delay excused by medical priority. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 10. lawyer aid in fir for illiterate acceptable. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 11. complainant credible eye-witness to assault. (Para 28) |
| 12. harassment motive proved by prior threats. (Para 29) |
| 13. minor discrepancies, poor probe not fatal. (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 14. interested witnesses credible if reliable. (Para 33) |
| 15. guilt proved beyond all reasonable doubt. (Para 34) |
| 16. life reduced to fixed 14-year imprisonment. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 17. appeal partly allowed post sentence. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, J.
1. Heard Shri R.P. Mishra, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Shri S.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the materials available on record.
2. The present Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) has been preferred by the appellant- Jagdamba Harijan, against the impugned Judgment and order dated 30.08.2018, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Court No.2, Pratapgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 08 of 2015 (State vs. Jagdamba Harijan), arising out of Case Crime No. 147 of 2014, relating to Police Station Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 304, 326-A & 452 I.P.C. and sentenced under & 326-A I.P.C. for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and under Section 452 I.P.C. for rigorous imprisonment of 02 years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and to further undergo six months’ additional imprisonment in case of default in payment of fine. However, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the appellant for the offence under Section 323 I.P.C.
CASE OF THE PROSECUTION
3. The factual matrix leading up to the filing of the present Criminal Appeal is delineated herein-below:-
3.1) In the present case, with respect to an incident occurred in the intervening night of 07/08.05.2014 at about 2:00 AM, a written ‘tehrir’ (Exhibit-Ka-1) was filed at Police Station Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh, by the informant/complainant Dinesh Verma, who is the son/ brother-in-law of the deceased. In the said tehrir, it was alleged that while the informant was sleeping in a thatched shed (chappar) in front of his house, he heard screams raised by his mother, (Phoolan Devi) and sister-in-law (Suman Devi). Upon rushing inside the house, he noticed that acid had been thrown on the faces and bodies of his mother and sister-in-law.
3.2) It was further stated by Dinesh Verma (P.W.-1) that in the light of torch, he saw the present appellant- Jagdamba Harijan, at the place of occurrence, holding a stick in his hand. Another person was also present beside him, whose identity could not be ascertained as his face was covered with a cloth. P.W.-1 further stated that he recognised the appellant, as he had earlier visited informant’s house on a couple of occasions and used to frequently visit the house of his sister-in-law, even prior to her marriage, a fact which came to the knowledge of the family only after the marriage. It was also alleged that the appellant had previously extended threats to kill the informant’s brother i.e. husband of Suman Devi. The informant further stated that when he attempted to chase the assailants on the said date of incident from the crime spot, they assaulted him with a stick and thereafter, fled from the spot on a motorcycle. It was also alleged that the father-in-law of the informant’s brother had been subjected to regular haras
Acid attack conviction under IPC §§304, 326A upheld on eyewitness testimony despite FIR delay and minor discrepancies; life sentence reduced to 14 years fixed term balancing retribution, time served,....
Acid attack – Acid attacks not only cause damage to physical appearance of its victims but also cause immense psychological trauma – Delay in filing FIR alone cannot refute entire prosecution story.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere testimony of the victim is insufficient without corroboration.
Acid Attack - Eye witnesses - Admissibility of - As a consequence of fact that injuries to the witness is an inbuilt guarantee of his presence at scene of crime and because the witness would not want....
A conviction for an acid attack was overturned due to lack of credible evidence linking the accused, highlighting the necessity of substantial proof in sensitive cases involving caste dynamics.
(1) Murder, attempt to murder and rioting – When genesis and manner of incident itself are doubtful, benefit of doubt should always be in favour of accused.(2) Appreciation of evidence – While apprec....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
