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

2008 Supreme(UK) 439

2009 N.C.C. 534
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C. Pant and Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.S. Verma
Criminal Appeal No. 1389 of 2001
BHAGAT SINGH & THREE ORS. – Appellants
Versus
STATE OF U.P. – Respondent
Decided on : 30.09.2008

Advocates:
For the Appellants : Mr. U.P.S. Negi, Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr. Amit Bhatt, Learned A.G.A.

Headnote:(A) Oath Act, 1969, Sec. 7 — Provisions of — Oath Statement — Validity of — Merely for the reason that the oath is not administered to a witness, his or her statement does not become inadmissible — The judgment of the Apex Court reported in AIR 1952 SC 252 relied on. (Para 7)

       (B) Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Sec. 32, Clause (i) — Dying Declaration — Validity of — Principle of law — That where the witnesses have stated before the court that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make a statement, dying declaration can be read in evidence even if there is no certificate of any Medical Officer to that effect — The judgment of the Apex Court reported in 2002 (45), All Cr.C. 1062 relied on. (Para 8)

       ¼v½ vksFk vf/kfu;e] 1969] /kkjk&7 & ds izkfo/kku ds rgr 'kiFk iwoZd c;ku dh oS/krk & dsoy bl dkj.k ls fd lk{kh dks 'kiFk xzg.k ugh djkbZ xbZ Fkh mldk c;ku viBuh; ugha cu tkrk & mPpre U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; AIR 1952 SC 252 dks vkèkkj ekuk x;kA ¼izLrj 7½

       ¼c½ Hkkjrh; lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872] /kkjk&32 okD;ka'k (i) & e`R;q le; ds c;ku dh oS/kkfudrk & fof/k dk fl)kUr & tgk¡ ij lk{kh }kjk U;k;ky; ds lEeq[k ;g dgk x;k gks fd e`rd efLr"d dh lgh n'kk esa Fkk rkfd c;ku ns lds rks e`R;q le; dk c;ku bl fLFkfr esa Hkh lk{; esa i<+k tk,xk ;fn fpfdRlk vf/kdkjh }kjk bl lEcUèk esa fjiksVZ Hkh uk nh xbZ gks mPpre U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; 2002 (45), All Cr.C. 1062 dks vk/kkj ekuk x;kA ¼izLrj 8½

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. (Oral) :

This appeal, preferred under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (herein after referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 05.06.01.1994, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Chamoli, at Gopeshwar, in Sessions Trial No. 22 of 1992, whereby accused/appellants namely Bhagat Singh and Darwan Singh, are convicted under Sections 147 and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.) and accused/appellants Birendra Singh and Narain Singh, are convicted under Section 148 I.P.C. and 302 read with Section 149 of I.P.C. Each of the convicts namely Bhagat Singh and Darwan Singh has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 147 I.P.C. and to imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. And each of the accused/appellants Birendra Singh and Narain Singh has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 148 I.P.C. and imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C.

2. Herd learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.

3. Prosecution story in brief is that on 31.03.1992, at about 8:00 p.m., complainant Jasdei Devi (P.W.1) resident of Village Baramwadi, had gone to her cow-shed,. Her husband Kunwar Singh (deceased) was serving food to his children inside the house. At that point of time accused/appellants Bhagat Singh, Birendra Singh, Darwan Singh and Narain Singh along with one Umed Singh, came to the courtyard of the complainant and started removing and throwing away the slates of the roof of the house of the complainant. Accused Bhagat Singh was in possession of a torch, accused Birendra Singh was armed with Khukari, accused Darwan Singh was armed with Lathi and accused Narain Singh and Umed Singh were armed with Thamalis (sharp edged weapon like sickle). Accused after damaging his house caught hold of Kunwar Singh and started inflicting injuries on his person with the weapons, they possessed. They left Kunwar Singh in a badly injured condition. On 01.04.1992, complainant Jasdei Devi went to the Naib Tehsildar, Ukhimath and lodged the First Information Report (Ext. A-1). (In the interior hills revenue officials are given police powers vide U.P. Government Notification No. 494/VIII-418-16, dated 07.03.1916). Patwari of the area (Bhiri) after registering the case and preparing the check report (Ext. A-7), and making necessary entry in the general diary (copy Ext. A-8), started the investigation. Initially the crime was registered relating to offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 325, 452, 147, 427, 504 and 506 I.P.C. He interrogated Smt. Jasdei Devi (complainant) and her son Dinesh Singh. Thereafter, he proceeded to the spot and prepared site plan (Ext. A-9). He also recovered the blood stained clothes of Kunwar Singh and prepared memorandum (Ext. A-11). Meanwhile, Kunwar Singh in an injured condition had already been taken to primary health centre, Ukhimath, where he was medically examined on 01.04.1992 at 2:10 p.m. by Dr. K.C. Rai and Dr. S.P. Sharma (none of the two examined by the prosecution). He appears to have prepared injury report, showing as many as 14 injures (this document is neither proved by anyone nor the genuineness of the document is admitted by the defence counsel). It appears that a dying declaration (Ext. A-4) was recorded on 01.04.1992, at 4:15 p.m. by Tehsildar, Ukhimath (Incharge Sub-Divisional Magistrate) without any mention of the fact that the injured was conscious or not. According to the prosecution story, the injured Kunwar Singh was referred by Medical Officer of Ukhimath to the District Hospital Gopeshwar (Chamoli) where he was declared brought dead. The Investigating Officer appears to have taken the dead body of the deceased in his possession and prepared inquest report (Ext. A-19) and other necessary papers. Dr. G.S. Gupta (not examined by







































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top