HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
J.J. MUNIR, SANJIV KUMAR, JJ.
Ram Das and others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 104 of 1989
Decided On : 29-04-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of criminal appeal case and procedural history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. presentation of prosecution witnesses and medical forensic analysis. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. competing arguments regarding reliability of testimony and evidence. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. legal consequences of delayed fir and burden of proving motive. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. evaluation of eyewitness credibility versus medical contradictions. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 6. acquittal due to failure of proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 32 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT :
Sanjiv Kumar, J.
1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by three convicts Ram Das, Suraj Singh and Munendra against the common judgment and order dated 12.01.1989 passed by Sri Sarnam Singh, the then Ist Additional Session Judge, Farrukhabad, in Session Trial No. 9 of 1985 connected with Session Trial No.210 of 1985, under Section 302 Indian Penal Code (in short ‘I.P.C.’).
2. By the impugned judgment and order, the appellants, namely Ram Das, Suraj Singh and Munendra were held guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C., convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the informant, Ram Ratan, son of Bhairav, a resident of Village Nardoli, Police Station Sikanderpur Baish, District Etah submitted a written application (tehrir) at Police Station Kampil, District Farrukhabad, stating therein that on 17.07.1984, his brother of full blood, Asha Ram, had gone to Kampil to meet his aunt (Bua). While returning to Village Nardoli along with Baba Ravi Giri, Sohan Lal and Ram Deen, near Village Nakara falling within local limits of Police Station Sikanderpur Baish, four men, namely Vinod Kumar, Ram Das, Suraj Singh and Munendra Singh, residents of Village Nagla Malikhan, Police Station Patiyali, District Etah, intercepted and surrounded them and pointed country-made pistols at his brother, Asha Ram and his companions. Despite repeated requests and entreaties to spare him, Munendra Singh instructed his companions to leave the others unharmed and thereafter shot at Asha Ram, declaring that Asha Ram had earlier killed his father, Kishan Pal and that the time had come to take revenge. Thereupon, Munendra Singh, Ram Das and Suraj Singh opened fire employing their country-made pistols to shoot the informant’s brother, Asha Ram, causing his death on the spot. Vinod Kumar stood nearby, brandishing his country-made pistol (tamancha) and threatening the informant and others. Upon alarm being raised, all the accused fled from the scene towards Jinol. It is further said that on the previous day, the informant had gone to Police Station Sikandarpur, District Etah to lodge a report, but the same was not registered on the ground that the offence fell within the jurisdiction of Police Station Kampil. Thereafter, the informant proceeded to lodge the present First Information Report. The incident is stated to have occurred on 17.07.1984 at about 12:00 noon.
4. On the basis of this information, First Information Report being Case Crime No. 141 of 1984, Section 302 I.P.C. was lodged at Police Station Kampil on 18.07.1984 at 12:20 p.m.. The investigation was entrusted to D.R. Mishra, Station House Officer of the police station concerned. The Investigating Officer commenced investigation and reached the place of occurrence, from where he collected plain earth, bloodstained earth, bloodstained umbrella and a towel and prepared a recovery memo thereof. He also prepared the site-plan and recorded the statements of the informant and other witnesses. The inquest of the deceased was held, an inquest report was prepared and the body was sent for autopsy. The post-mortem of the deceased was conducted and the cause of death was opined as shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante-mortem gunshot injuries.
5. After investigation, a charge sheet was filed against Vinod Kumar, Ram Das and Su
The court emphasized the prosecution's burden to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to substantial doubts regarding the credibility of witness testimo....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies in witness testimonies can lead to acquittal.
The quality of evidence and prompt lodging of the FIR are crucial in establishing guilt in criminal cases.
Point of Law : While appreciating the evidence of a witness, minor discrepancies on trivial matters, which do not affect the core of the prosecution case, may not prompt the court to reject the evide....
Interested witnesses, such as close relatives of the deceased, can provide credible testimony and their evidence should be carefully scrutinized but not automatically discarded. In cases of direct ev....
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.