Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sujoy Paul, Binod Kumar Dwivedi, JJ.
Ravi Kushwaha S/o Gangaram Kushwaha & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh, Through Police Station Gorakhpur & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 6479 of 2023
Decided On : 19-12-2023
(1) Practice (Criminal) -- name not mentioned in FIR -- no rule of thumb that person cannot be held guilty despite availability of legal evidence against him merely because his name was not mentioned in FIR. AIR 1983 SC 554, G. AIR 2007 SC 1253 and AIR 2008 SC 155 followed. (1976) 4 SCC 288 and (2007) 8 SCC 523 referred to. [Para 48]
(2) FIR -- cannot be encyclopaedia containing minute details of everything -- accused does not get right of acquittal merely because his name not mentioned in Dehati Nalishi/ FIR. [Para 50]
(3) Test Identification Parade -- injured witness stated at threshold that appellants were his distant relatives -- he and injured wife identified all assailants in Court -- not conducting TIP not fatal to case of prosecution. [Paras 51 & 52]
(4) Witness -- omission -- injured witness deposed in Court that he saw appellants coming out of house of deceased -- no such narration of fact in his case diary statement -- it is serious omission -- makes his statement untrustworthy to that extent. [Para 53]
(5) Evidence -- delay in recording case diary statements of injured witness and deceased -- injured persons taken to hospital immediately and were under treatment -- statements recorded a day after -- no inordinate delay -- will not cause any dent to case of prosecution -- more so when Investigating Officer was not put to cross-examination on aspect of delay. (1973) 2 SCC 444, (2002) 8 SCC 45, (2004) 1 SCC 414 and (2005) 3 SCC 114 followed. [Para 54]
(6) Recovery -- from open space -- statement of Investigating Officer makes it clear that although weapons were recovered from open space but were hidden inside bush -- recovery not doubtful. (1994) 4 SCC 370 followed. [Para 55]
(7) Witness -- as per S. 134 of Evidence Act, quantity of witnesses not important -- quality of deposition important. [Para 60]
(8) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 32 -- Criminal P. C., 1973 -- S. 161 -- dying declaration -- case diary statement of deceased recorded u/s. 161 of CrPC can be treated as dying declaration because it is last statement recorded before death. [Para 61]
(9) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 32 -- dying declaration -- can be relied upon even if recorded by Investigating Officer. (2013) 12 SCC 121 followed. (1976) 3 SCC 104 discussed. [Para 62]
(10) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 32 -- dying declaration -- fit state of mind -- doctor gave certificate of fitness after recording of dying declaration -- held -- he clearly certified that patient was conscious and oriented to time, place and person -- no amount of cross-examination could cause any damage to his statement -- deceased was in fit state of mind. [Para 63]
(11) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 32 -- dying declaration -- deceased made statement when her death was expected -- dying declaration not recorded with undue delay -- recorded by following ‘rule of first opportunity’ -- no reasonable suspicion to believe she was tutored by anybody -- no such argument advanced also -- declarant had opportunity to clearly observe incident -- statement recorded properly -- cannot be said that dying declaration is manifestation/fiction of dying person’s imagination -- certainly given voluntarily -- no reason to disbelieve.2023 SCC Online SC 1060 followed. [Para 64]
(12) Legal Maxim -- nemo moriturus praesumitur mentirs -- nobody about to die is presumed to lie -- nobody would like to meet his creator with lie in his/her mouth. [Para 65]
(13) Spot Map -- position of witnesses not clearly mentioned -- witnesses not present when deceased assaulted -- flaw of this nature not fatal to case of prosecution.(2004) 13 SCC 279 followed. 2023 SCC Online MP 261 relied on. [Para 67]
(14) Recovery -- absence of blood on weapon -- no straitjacket formula that accused can be held guilty only when human blood is found on weapon -- ocular evidence, medical evidence and circumstances lead to only one conclusion that appellants and only appellants were responsible for overt act -- they can be certainly held guilty for offences. [Para 68]
(15) Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 302, 450, 307/34, 324/34 and 323/34 -- established beyond reasonable doubt by oral dying declaration that appellants assaulted deceased and her husband by lathis and knife, because of which both of them died -- cross-examination on aspect of oral dying declarations -- injured witnesses clearly deposed about overt act of all appellants -- their statements could not be demolished during cross-examination -- corresponding injuries and medical evidence also support case of prosecution -- prosecution established its case beyond reasonable doubt -- conviction upheld -- considering mitigating and aggravating circumstances, death sentence altered to life imprisonment for remainder of life with fine. ILR 2023 MP 353 relied on. 2023 LiveLaw (MP) 62 referred to. [Paras 70, 77 & 78]
(16) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 386 -- remand for re-trial -- not a case where on account of indigency, poverty, illiteracy or any other possible factor, appellants could not engage counsel of their choice -- engaged private counsel of their choice -- merely because his performance was not to expectation, on mere asking, matter cannot be remanded for re-trial. (2004) 4 SCC 158 and 2022 SCC Online SC 1396 distinguished. (2012) 9 SCC 408 and (2022) 2 SCC 89 referred to. [Para 72]
(17) Fair Trial -- incompetence of counsel -- framing rules in this regard not within province of Court -- needs to be looked into by authorities concerned. (2016) 2 SCC 402 referred to. [Paras 73 & 74]
(18) Sentence -- capital punishment -- imposition of capital punishment deserves microscopic scrutiny -- aggravating and mitigating circumstances are required to be examined -- apart from this, apex Court has laid down ‘Crime Test’, ‘Criminal Test’ and ‘R-R test’. ILR 2023 MP 353 relied on. [Para 77]
¼1½ çFkk ¼nkafMd½ & çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ esa uke mfYyf[kr ugha & dksbZ O;kogkfjd fu;e ugha fd ek= blfy, fd çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ esa ml O;fä ds uke dk mYys[k ugha Fkk] mlds fo:) fof/kd lk{; dh miyC/krk ds ckotwn mls nks"kh vfHkfu/kkZfjr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ,vkbvkj 1983 ,llh 554] ,vkbvkj 2007 ,llh 1253 rFkk ,vkbvkj 2008 ,llh 155 vuqlfjrA ¼1976½ 4 ,llhlh 288 rFkk ¼2007½ 8 ,llhlh 523 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 48½
¼2½ çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ & leLr ckrksa ds C;kSjs okyk fo'odks"k ugha gks ldrh & vfHk;qä dks ek= blfy, nks"keqfä dk vf/kdkj çkIr ugha gks tkrk fd nsgkrh ukfy'kh@çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ esa mlds uke dk mYys[k ughaA ¼iSjk 50½
¼3½ 'kuk[r ijsM ijh{kk & {kfrxzLr lk{kh us vkjaHk esa gh dgk fd vihykFkhZx.k mlds nwj ds ukrsnkj Fks & mlus vkSj mldh {kfrxzLr iRuh us U;k;ky; esa lHkh geykojksa dh 'kuk[r dh & 'kuk[r ijsM ijh{kk ugha djkuk vfHk;kstu i{kdFku ds fy, ?kkrd ughaA ¼iSjk 51 ,oa 52½
¼4½ lk{kh & yksi & {kfrxzLr lk{kh us U;k;ky; esa vfHklk{; fn;k fd mlus vihykFkhZx.k dks e`rdksa ds ?kj ls ckgj vkrs ns[kk & mlds dsl Mk;jh dFku esa ,slk dksbZ rF;kRed o.kZu ugha & xaHkhj yksi gS & ml lhek rd mldk dFku vfo'oluh; cuk nsrk gSA ¼iSjk 53½
¼5½ lk{; & {kfrxzLr lk{kh vkSj e`rdk ds dsl Mk;jh dFku vfHkfyf[kr djus esa foyac & {kfrxzLr O;fä;ksa dks vfoyac fpfdRlky; ys tk;k x;k rFkk og mipkjjr Fks & dFku ,d fnu i'pkr~ vfHkfyf[kr & vR;f/kd foyac ugha & vfHk;kstu i{kdFku dks dksbZ vk?kkr ugha igq¡psxk & rc vkSj Hkh tc vUos"k.k vf/kdkjh dh foyac ds igyw ij çfrijh{kk ugha dh xbZA ¼1973½ 2 ,llhlh 444] ¼2002½ 8 ,llhlh 45] ¼2004½ 1 ,llhlh 414 rFkk ¼2005½ 3 ,llhlh 114 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 54½
¼6½ cjkenxh & [kqys LFkku ls & vUos"k.k vf/kdkjh ds dFku ls Li"V gks tkrk gS fd ;|fi gfFk;kj [kqys LFkku ls cjken fd, x,- rFkkfi og >kM+h ds Hkhrj fNis Fks & cjkenxh lansgkLin ughaA ¼1994½ 4 ,llhlh 370 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 55½
¼7½ lk{kh & lk{; vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 134 ds vuqlkj- lkf{k;ksa dh la[;k egRoiw.kZ ugha & vfHklk{; dh xq.koÙkk egRoiw.kZA ¼iSjk 60½
¼8½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 & /kkjk 32 & naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 161 & e`R;qdkfyd dFku & naM çfØ;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 161 ds v/khu vfHkfyf[kr e`rdk ds dsl Mk;jh dFku dks e`R;qdkfyd dFku ekuk tk ldrk gS D;ksafd og e`R;q ds iwoZ vfHkfyf[kr vafre dFku gSA ¼iSjk 61½
¼9½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 & /kkjk 32 & e`R;qdkfyd dFku & vUos"k.k vf/kdkjh }kjk vfHkfyf[kr gks rc Hkh voyac fy;k tk ldrk gSA ¼2013½ 12 ,llhlh 121 vuqlfjrA ¼1976½ 3 ,llhlh 104 foosfprA ¼iSjk 62½
¼10½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 & /kkjk 32 & e`R;qdkfyd dFku & Bhd ekufld n'kk & fpfdRld us Bhd n'kk esa gksus dk çek.ki= e`R;qdkfyd dFku vfHkfyf[kr fd, tkus ds mijkar fn;k & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & mUgksaus Li"Vr% çekf.kr fd;k fd jksxh lpsr Fkh rFkk le;] LFkku vkSj O;fä ds laca/k esa vuqLFkkfir Fkh & fdruh Hkh çfrijh{kk muds dFku dks uqdlku ugha igq¡pk ldh & lk{; voyacuh;A ¼iSjk 63½
¼11½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 & /kkjk 32 & e`R;qdkfyd dFku & e`rdk us rc dFku fd;k tc mldh e`R;q çR;kf'kr Fkh & e`R;qdkfyd dFku vlE;d~ foyac ls vfHkfyf[kr ugha & ^^çFke volj dk fu;e** vuqlfjr dj vfHkfyf[kr & ;g fo'okl djus ds fy, dksbZ ;qfä;qä lansg ugha fd mls fdlh O;fä }kjk fl[kk;k@iढ+k;k x;k & ,slk dksbZ rdZ Hkh ugha fn;k x;k & dFkudrkZ dks ?kVuk Li"Vr% ns[kus dk volj çkIr Fkk & dFku mfpr :i ls vfHkfyf[kr & ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd e`R;qdkfyd dFku ej.kklUu O;fä dh vfHkO;atukdYiuk dh —fr gS & fuf'pr :i ls LosPN;k fn;k x;k & vfo'okl djus dk dksbZ dkj.k ughaA 2023 ,llhlh v‚uykbu ,llh 1060 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 64½
¼12½ fof/kd lw= & uheks e‚fjVîwjl fçL;wfeVj esfUVlZ & fdlh Hkh ej.kklUu O;fä }kjk feF;k cksys tkus dh mi/kkj.kk ugha dh tkrh & dksbZ Hkh vius eq[k ij feF;k ckr ysdj fo/kkrk ds ikl tkuk ugha pkgsxk@pkgsxhA ¼iSjk 65½
¼13½ LFky ekufp= & lkf{k;ksa dh fLFkfr Li"Vr% mfYyf[kr ugha & e`rd ij geyk gqvk rc lk{khx.k mifLFkr ugha & bl ç—fr dh xyrh vfHk;kstu i{kdFku ds fy, ?kkrd ughaA ¼2004½ 13 ,llhlh 279 vuqlfjrA 2023 ,llhlh v‚uykbu ,eih 261 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 67½
¼14½ cjkenxh & gfFk;kj ij jä dk vHkko & dksbZ vifjorZuh; lw= ugha fd vfHk;qä dks rc gh nks"kh vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k tk ldrk gS tc gfFk;kj ij ekuo jä ik;k tk, & pk{kq"k lk{;& fpfdRlh; lk{; rFkk ifjfLFkfr;ksa ls ,d gh fu"d"kZ fudyrk gS fd vihykFkhZx.k rFkk dsoy vihykFkhZx.k gh çR;{k —R; ds fy, mÙkjnk;h Fks & mUgsa fuf'pr gh vijk/kksa ds fy, nks"kh vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k tk ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 68½
¼15½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 302] 450] 307@34] 324@34 rFkk 323@34 & ekSf[kd e`R;qdkfyd dFku ls ;qfä;qä lansg ds ijs LFkkfir fd vihykFkhZx.k us e`rdk vkSj mlds ifr ij ykfB;ksa vkSj pkdw ls geyk fd;k- ftlds dkj.k mu nksuksa dh e`R;q gks xbZ & ekSf[kd e`R;qdkfyd dFkuksa ds igyw ij dksbZ çfrijh{kk ugha & {kfrxzLr lkf{k;ksa us lHkh vihykFkhZx.k ds çR;{k ÑR; ds fo"k; esa Li"V vfHklk{; fn;k & çfrijh{kk ds nkSjku muds dFku /oLr ugha fd, tk lds & rnuq:i {kfr;ksa rFkk fpfdRlh; lk{; ls Hkh vfHk;kstu i{kdFku lefFkZr & vfHk;kstui{k us viuk i{kdFku ;qfä;qä lansg ds ijs LFkkfir fd;k & nks"kflf) iq"V & de djus okyh rFkk xq:rjdkjh ifjfLFkfr;ksa ij fopkj djrs gq,] e`R;q naMkns'k tqekZus lfgr 'ks"k thou ds fy, vkthou dkjkokl esa ifjofrZrA vkb,yvkj 2023 ,eih 353 voyafcrA 2023 ykboy‚ ¼,eih½ 62 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 70] 77 ,oa 78½
¼16½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 386 & iqufoZpkj.k ds fy, çfrçs"k.k & ,slk ekeyk ugha tg‚a vfdapurk nfjærk] fuj{kjrk ;k vU; fdlh laHko dkjd ds dkj.k vihykFkhZx.k viuh ilan dk dkmUlsy fu;qä ugha dj lds & viuh ilan dk çkbosV dkmUlsy fu;qä fd;k & ek= blfy, fd mldk çn'kZu çR;k'kk ds vuq:i ugha Fkk] dsoy e‚axs tkus ij] ekeyk iqufoZpkj.k ds fy, çfrçsf"kr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¼2004½ 4 ,llhlh 158 rFkk 2022 ,llhlh v‚uykbu ,llh 1396 çHksfnrA ¼2012½ 9 ,llhlh 408 rFkk ¼2022½ 2 ,llhlh 89 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 72½
¼17½ _tq fopkj.k & dkmUlsy dh v{kerk & bl ckjs esa fu;e fojfpr djuk U;k;ky; ds vf/kdkj {ks= esa ugha & lac) çkf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk ns[kk tkuk gksxkA ¼2016½ 2 ,llhlh 402 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 73 ,oa 74½
¼18½ naMkns'k & e`R;q 'kkfLr & e`R;q naM dk vf/kjksi.k vfrlw{e laoh{kk ;ksX; & de djus okyh rFkk xq:rjdkjh ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks ns[kuk visf{kr & blds vfrfjä] loksZPp U;k;ky; us ^^vijk/k ijh{k.k* ,oa ^^vijk/kh ijh{k.k** rFkk ^^vkjvkj ijh{k.k** vf/kdfFkr fd, gSaA vkb,yvkj 2023 ,eih 353 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 77½
JUDGMENT
1. These Criminal Appeals take exception to the judgment dated 26.04.2023 passed in S.T. No. 544/2021 whereby the appellants Ravi Kushwaha and Raja Kushwaha (in criminal appeal No. 6479 of 2023) and appellant Vinay Kushwaha (in criminal appeal No. 7954 of 2023) were held guilty for committing offences as under:
Appellants | Convicted under Sections | Sentenced to undergo |
1. Ravi Kushwaha | 302 of IPC (on two counts) | Death sentence to each accused (on each count). |
450 of IPC | R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- | |
307/34 of IPC | R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.10,000/- | |
324/34 of IPC | R.I. for one year with fine of Rs. 1,000/- | |
323/34 of IPC | R.I. for six months with fine of Rs. 1,000/-. | |
2. Raja Kushwaha | 302 of IPC (on two counts) | Death sentence to each accused (on each count). |
450 of IPC | R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- | |
307/34 of IPC | R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.10,000/- to each accused. | |
324/34 of IPC | R.I. for one year with fine of Rs. 1,000/- to each accused. | |
323/34 of IPC | R.I. for six months with fine of Rs. 1,000/- to each | |
|
| accused. | |
3. Vinay Kushwaha | 302 of IPC (on two counts) | Death sentence to each accused (on each count). |
450 of IPC | R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- | |
307/34 of IPC | R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.10,000/- | |
324/34 of IPC | R.I. for one year with fine of Rs. 1,000/-. | |
25(1-B)(b) of Arms Act | R.I. for one year with fine of Rs. 1,000/-. | |
With the direction that the sentences under Sections 450, 307/34, 324/34, 323/34 of IPC and 25(1-B)(b) of Arms Act (only for Vinay Kushwaha) shall run consecutively. | ||
2. The criminal reference heard analogously is also answered in this judgment.
3. Draped in brevity, the starting point of the case is lodging of Dehati Nalishi by Golu Kushwaha (PW-1) wherein he stated that on 14.06.2021 at around 10:45 pm, he was taking dinner. Main gate of his house was locked by him. He heard certain cries and found that by jumping his boundary wall Vinay Kushwaha, Raja Kushwaha and another boy entered the premises and started abusing him and his wife Ruchi (PW-8). Raja Kushwaha caused injuries to him by means of lathi. When his wife Ruchi tried to interfere, Vinay Kushwaha caused injury by means of knife on several parts of her body. His child Prateek was assaulted by Vinay by means of knife. He tried to chase them and outside his house he came to know that Vinay and Raja caused injuries by means of knife to Pushpraj and his wife Neelam. Thereafter police came and took the injured persons to medical hospital. Pushpraj was brought dead to hospital. On the basis of Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-1), a FIR (Ex.P-47) in Crime No. 357/21 was registered and accordingly investigation commenced. The injured persons namely Neelam Kushwaha, Prateek Kushwaha, Golu Kushwaha and Ruchi Kushwaha were taken to Medical Hospital and there statements as per their version were recorded.
4. After 'Merg' panchnama, post-mortem report of Pushpraj was prepared. From the scene of crime, blood stained and simple soil were collected and seized. The blood stained clothes of deceased and injured persons were seized in Medical College. Later on, Neelam Kushwaha succumbed to injuries on 23.06.2021. Before that her statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C was recorded on 16.06.2021. The appellants were arrested on 30.06.2021. In the custody, their memorandum statements were recorded and lathi and knives allegedly used in assault were recovered from them. Accordingly, offence under Section 25 of Arms Act was added. The seized material, after the query, were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), Sagar for examination. After completion of investigation, the challan was filed before Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Jabalpur. The said Court committed the matter to the Sessions Court. The appellants abjured the guilt and pleaded innocence. The Court below framed six questions for its determination, recorded statements of 26 prosecution witnesses but no defence witness was examined. After hearing the parties, the Court below passed t
The dying declaration of the deceased was found to be trustworthy and reliable, leading to the appellants' conviction under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court emphasized the credibility of dying declarations as substantive evidence, modifying convictions based on the established intent and involvement of the accused in the crime.
Murder – Non-examination of Doctor who conducted autopsy on dead body of deceased and who prepared post-mortem report is not fatal to case of prosecution.
The delay in recording witness statements and minor discrepancies in evidence do not necessarily undermine the credibility of the witnesses or the prosecution's case.
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
