IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
G.S. Ahluwalia, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, JJ.
Ahmed Sayeed & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Cr.A. No. 410 of 2010 With Cr.A. No. 456 of 2010
Decided On : 04-01-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and facts. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments by the defense about witness reliability. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's observations on evidence and its evaluation. (Para 13 , 19 , 48) |
| 4. medical evidence of deceased individuals. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. discussion on the legal implications of evidence conflicts. (Para 30 , 31) |
| 6. analysis of the common object of unlawful assembly. (Para 46 , 50) |
| 7. final decision and implications. (Para 91 , 92) |
JUDGMENT
G.S. Ahluwalia J. - By this common judgment, the Cr.A. No. 410/2010 and Cr.A. No. 456 of 2010 shall be decided.
2. Cr.A. No. 410 of 2010 has been filed by Appellants Ahmed Sayeed, Samim, Anees and Shakeel against the judgment and sentence dated 13-4-2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sironj, Distt. Vidisha in S.T. No. 15/2004, by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced for the following offences :
a. Under Section 302 /149 of I.P.C. (On three counts for murder of Fida Mohd., Abdul Azeez and Rabia bi) and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.1000/- in default 6 months R.I., on three counts ;
b. Under Section 307 /149 of I.P.C. (On three counts for attempting to kill Anwar, Johra bi, and Mohd. Khalil) and sentenced to undergo 7 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default 6 months R.I., on three counts ;
c. Appellant Ahmed Sayeed under Section 148 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 1 year R.I. and fine of Rs. 500/- in default 3 months R.I.
d. Appellants Samim, Anees and Shakeel under Section 147 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 1 year R.I. and fine of Rs. 500/- in default 3 months R.I.
All the sentences to run concurrently.
Whereas Cr.A. No.456/2010 has been filed by the State for enhancement of sentence and for award of death penalty.
3. The necessary facts for disposal of present appeal in short are that the complainant Gaffar Khan lodged a Dehati Nalishi, Ex. P.1 on 5-5-2003 at 10:25 A.M., on the allegations that he is the resident of village Jhujhalakheda and is an agriculturist by profession. There was a dispute between Abdul Azeez and Ahmed Sayeed on the question of boundary of field. At about 8:00 A.M., Haneef Khan, Munne bhai, Fida Bhai and the complainant had gone to amicably settle the matter. Anees, Shakeel, Yusuf and Shamim, all sons of Ahmed Sayeed were also there. The complainant, Munna bhai, Fida Bhai and Haneef Bhai were affixing stones on the earthen boundary. Ahmed Sayeed and his sons Anees, Samim, Yusuf and Shakeel started abusing and scuffling. They were separated by the complainant and others. Thereafter, Ahmed Sayeed and his sons ran towards their house. Ahmed Sayeed came out along with his .12 bore gun. Shakeel was following him along with a belt of cartridges. Shakeel, Yusuf and Samim also came there and started shouting that all should be killed. Ahmed Sayeed fired a gun shot causing injury to Khalil who was standing in the courtyard of Ahmed Sayeed. He fell down after sustaining gun shot injury. Thereafter, Ahmed Sayeed fired a gun shot causing injury to Azeez, who also fell down after sustaining gun shot injury. Azeez was standing in front of the house of Munnawar. Rabia bi was also standing there, who also sustained gun shot injuries and also fell down. The children and other ladies came on the spot and started crying and pleading for mercy from Ahmed Sayeed, but Ahmed Sayeed did not stop. Anees, Shamim, Shakeel and Yusuf were exhorting that no one should be spared. Thereafter, Ahmed Sayeed, after reloading his gun caused gun shot injuries to Johra bi, Akhtar, Jamil, Anwar, Rabia bi, Chhammu Khan, Haneef Khan. Ahmed Sayeed was challenging that if any body has a courage, then he may come forward. The people ran helter-skelter. Fida Bhai along with his wife, was going on a motor cycle to lodge a report. The movement he started the motor cycle, Sayeed Ahmed came nearer to the house of the complainant, and fired a gun shot causing injuries to Fida and his wife as a result, both of them fell d
Abdul Sayeed vs. State of M.P.
Amar Singh Yadav vs. State of U.P.
Bachan Singh and others vs. State of Punjab
Bhagwan Jagannath Markad vs. State of Maharashtra
Bhagwan Swaroop vs. State of M.P.
Bijay Singh and others vs. State of M.P.
CBI vs. Mohd. Parvez Abdul Kayuum
Dattu Shamrao Valake vs. State of Maharashtra
Dev Karan vs. State of Haryana
Gurvinder Singh vs. State of Punjab
Hamsa vs. State of Kerala. 1966 KLT 136
Harjinder Singh @ Bhola vs. State of Punjab
Harjinder Singh vs. Delhi Administration
Jafel Biswas vs. State of W.B.
Jainul Haque vs. State of Bihar
Khima Vikamshi and others vs. State of Gujarat
Krishna Gope vs. State of Bihar
Kuldeep Yadav and others vs. State of Bihar
Lakshman Prasad vs. State of Bihar
Lakshman Singh vs. State of Bihar
Lalitha vs. Sarangadharan - 1988 (2) KLT 394
Manjit Singh vs. State of Punjab
Menoka Malik vs. State of W.B.
Mohd. Asif vs. State of Uttaranchal
Mohd. Ishaque vs. State of W.B.
Nagji Odhavji Kumbhar vs. State of Gujarat
Parsuram Pandey and others vs. state of Bihar
Ram Narain vs. State of Punjab
Ramaiah @ Rama vs. State of Karnataka
Rukma (Smt) and others vs. Jala and others
Santosh Kumar Singh vs. State of M.P.
Sarwan Singh Rattan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Sarwan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Shaji and others vs. State of Kerala
Shri Gopal and others vs. Subhash and others
State of Bihar vs. Bishwanath Rai and others
State of Haryana vs. Gurdial Singh and others
State of Karnataka vs. Moin Patel
State of Rajasthan vs. Bhawani
State of U.P. vs. Ram Bahadur Singh and others
State of Uttarakhand vs. Darshan Singh
Subedar Tewari vs. State of U.P.
Sukhbir Singh vs. State of Haryana
Sukhwant Singh vs. State of Punjab - MANU/SC/0305/1995 : AIR 1995 SC 1601
Suraj Mal vs. State (Delhi Adm)
Vinubhai Ranchhodbhai Patel vs. Rajivbhai Dudabhai Patel
Virsa Singh vs. State of Punjab
Criminal Law - Unlawful assembly - Conviction upheld - While overt act and active participation may indicate common intention of the person perpetrating the crime, the mere presence in unlawful assem....
The appellate court can set aside a trial court's finding of acquittal if it finds that the finding is perverse and against the weight of evidence.
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.