Back
2023 Supreme(MP) 514
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sujoy Paul, Amar Nath Kesharwani, JJ.
Sachin & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 257, 296, 309, 356, 408, 709 of 2016
Decided On : 03-02-2023
Siddharth Datt, Advocate, Arvind Singh, Advocate, Ajay Jain, Advocate, Anita Kaithwas, Advocate, Surendra Sing, Advocate, Ashwani Dubey, Advocate, R.S. Yadav, Advocate
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 149, and 201 - Common judgment in criminal appeals relating to conviction and acquittal of accused - Prosecution failed to establish the circumstances of murders beyond reasonable doubt, due to lack of convincing eyewitness testimony and a flawed investigation that left many crucial links unproven. No reliable evidence was presented to establish the timeline or motive beyond mere suspicion. (Paras 29, 50, 73)
(B) Appeal - Acquittal of Certain Accused - Court emphasized that suspicion alone cannot substitute for proof, and significant inconsistencies in witness statements led to doubts about the prosecution's case. (Paras 32, 36)
Facts of the case:
Appellants were convicted for the murders of two individuals following an altercation, based primarily on the testimony of a key witness who was later deemed unreliable. Evidence included blood-stained clothing and weapons, but the prosecutorial chain remained largely unverified. The investigation was criticized for flaws. (Paras 1-8, 49)
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the prosecution had not proved its case as required and granted the benefit of doubt to the accused, consequently overturning the lower court's convictions. (Paras 79)
Issues: The main issues revolved around the reliability of eyewitness testimony, the burden of proof required in criminal cases, and the integrity of the investigative process. (Paras 19, 50)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that a conviction must be based on strong and credible evidence rather than suspicion, emphasizing that each link in the prosecution's chain of evidence must be solidly established. (Paras 29, 73)
Result: Criminal appeals allowed; convictions overturned and appellants acquitted.
JUDGMENT
Sujoy Paul, J. - These batch of appeals are filed challenging the common judgment passed in S.T. No. 169/2010 dated 05.01.2016 by learned Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad whereby out of 15 accused persons, 4 were acquitted and 11 were convicted for committing offences under Sections 302 read with 149 and 201 of the IPC. The accused persons were convicted and sentenced by the trial Court as under -
Sr. | Name of appellant | Conviction under Section | Sentence |
1. | Bablu @ Sada | 302/149 (on two counts for | Life imprisonment |
murdering Munnu @ | with fine of Rs. | ||
2. | Pawan Mourya | Mrityunjay Upadhyay and | 2,000/- and in |
Sachin Tiwari) | default to undergo | ||
3. | Mukku @ Mukul | R.I. for three months | |
(on each count) | |||
4. | Ankur Mehta | ||
5. | Anshul Sehgal | ||
6. | Shankar Mihani | ||
7. | Sachin Binekia | 201 of IPC (on two | R.I. for 7 years with |
8. | Deepak @ Golu Gajraj | counts) | fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default to |
9. | Ghanshaym @ Bheda | three months (on each count) | |
10. | Tukku @ Vikram | ||
@ Vikki | |||
11. | Hitesh @ Chhota | ||
| Sunni Mehra |
|
|
2. As per the case of prosecution, on 18.02.2010 near a marriage hall, at Itarsi, the main accused Shankar Mihani along with other accused persons pressurized Sachin Tiwari (deceased) to give an affidavit in favour of accused Anshul. The friend of Sachin namely 408 of 2016 & 709 of 2016 Munnu @ Mritunjay opposed the same. Accused Anshul assaulted Munnu by means of fists and quarrel began from this incident. During altercation and exchange of heat, appellant Shankar Mihani directed other accused persons to take Munnu and Sachin to Azad Panja Crossing. Munnu and Sachin Tiwari were under the influence of liquor and therefore they could not resist much. All the accused persons took them on their foot to Azad Panja Crossing. Accused Golu Mehra brought motorcycle of Munnu @ Mritunjay to Azad Panja Chowk. At this place again Shanker Mihani pressurized Sachin to give an affidavit in favoaur of accused Anshul. Sachin Tiwari and Munnu did not succumb to such pressure. During heated altercation on this, all the accused persons by means of sharp weapons assaulted Sachin and Munnu. Munnu and Sachin died at Azad Panja Chowk. A person riding a horse i.e. Gullu (PW-8) had seen the said incident. Shankar Mihani directed other accused persons to bring that horse rider. Two accused persons tried to bring the said person but their effort could not fetch any result. Both the dead bodies were thrown in the field of Raja Patel. Accused Takku had removed the chain from the neck of Munnu and kept his purse with him.
Cr. A. No.408 of 2016 :
Contention of Appellant's Counsel :
3. The story of prosecution further shows that Munnu left his house on 18.02.2010 at around 7:30 PM but did not return back to his house situated at Gandhi Nagar crossing. The family members unsuccessfully tried to get information about him. Brother of Munnu, namely Gyanendra Kishore Upadhayay lodged a missing person report on 19.02.2010 at Serial No. 20/10 in Roznamcha Sanha No. 1472. During search of Munnu, his brother came to know that friend of Munnu, Sachin Tiwari is also missing and did not return to his house. During the search of both of them, their dead bodies were found near Boodhi Mata Mandir road in the field of Rajesh Patel. The motorcycle of Munnu was also found nearby. The FIR was registered against unknown persons for committing offence under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC.
4. The investigation was initially conducted by A.S.I. Ramkumar Dhariya (PW-41). However, as submitted by learned Sr. counsel for the appellant, midway, on verbal direction of Superintendent of Police (SP), the investigation was handed over to A.S.I. Anil Bajpai (PW-40). He conducted the investigation with effect from 24th Feb., 2010. This new Investigating Officer Shri Bajpai recorded the statement of Manoj Rajwanshi (PW-6) and Gullu @ Gaya Prasad (PW-8). On the basis of statement of Manoj Rajwanshi (PW-6), a story of conspiracy inside Hoshangabad Jail was prepared. It is alleged that main accused Shankar Mihani was the master
