HIGH COURT OF NAGPUR
PARMANAND GANGA PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
EMPEROR – Respondent
Decided on : 04-04-1940
TORTURE - Criminal Law - Section 302, Section 331, Section 330, I.P.C. - The judgment discusses the admissibility of statements made by a deceased person as to the cause of his death, the evidentiary value of dying declarations, and the requirement for independent corroboration of witness statements. The court also examines the role of police officers in causing grievous hurt to the victims and the liability of the accused under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that police officers tortured the victims to extract confessions of theft, resulting in the death of one victim. The accused denied inflicting torture and claimed that the victim's injury was caused by a fall in a pit.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of causing grievous hurt to the victims and convicted them under Section 331 read with Section 34, I.P.C. Parmanand and Ishwari Prasad were also convicted under Section 330, I.P.C. The court rejected the defense's version of events and upheld the convictions.
Issues: Admissibility of dying declarations, evidentiary value of witness statements, liability of police officers for causing grievous hurt, and the defense's claim of the victim's injury being caused by a fall in a pit.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that dying declarations are admissible under Section 32(1), Evidence Act, and do not require independent corroboration. The court also found the accused guilty based on the oral evidence and rejected the defense's version of events.
Final Decision: All the appeals were dismissed, and the application for enhancement of sentence against Parmanand was accepted, resulting in a three-year rigorous imprisonment sentence for the offense under Section 331, I.P.C.
1. The prosecution Case is that on the night of 10th May 1939 a gold ring belonging to Puran and a gold mohar belonging to Khunde's son Himmat were stolen from their persons, while they were sleeping in the court-yard of Khunde. On report of the theft being made by Khunda (Ex. P-12 and P-13), investigation was first started by the accused Ishwari Prasad, head constable, and was subsequently taken up by the accused Parmanand Sub Inspector, on 12th May 1939. In Exs. P-12 and P-13 Khunde had definitely expressed his suspicion against Munde as it was he who was there at night shampooing the legs of Puran. The Sub-Inspector and the Head Constable Ishwari Prasad both suspected Munde but in all probability on Munde's version that Puran and Mt. Uddeti were bringing a false charge against Munde, they thought that the articles were with Puran and Uddeti. They took Puran, Mt. Uddeti and Munde to the Khalyan of Kanhai outside the village on 12th May 1939 with a view to extract confessions from them. Puran and Uddeti were first made to stand with hands and feet outstretched wide apart for about half an hour or so outside the Khalyan and Parmanand and Ishwari Prasad kicked them on their legs in order to keep them properly stretched. Subsequently Munde was made to sit on the ground inside the Khalyan and on the orders of the accused Parmanand and Ishwari Prasad the accused Bhaiyalal pressed his knees against Munde's back, while the other accused caught hold of his legs and stretched them wide apart. The accused Parmanand is alleged to have kicked Munde in the course of this operation which continued for a long time. Munde continued screaming aloud complaining of dislocation of his leg, but his wailinga were taken for false pretences. As a result of this torture, the left hip bona of Munde was found dislocated on medical examination on 16-5-1939 and inspite of medical treatment he succumbed on 22nd May 1939, Though the incident took place on 12th May 1939 Munde alone made a report on 16th May 1939 complaining of the torture inflicted on him. Puran and Uddeti did not make any complaint till after the investigation started on the complaint of Munde and during the investigation it also became clear that not only Munde but Puran and Uddeti also had been tortured for extracting confessions from them. It was then that for the first time reports were made by Puran and Uddeti on 26th of May 1939 and their reports are Exs. P-10 and P-ll.
2. The police investigated into the allegations and inasmuch as it was a case against police officers, the City Inspector in charge of Saugor Kotwali by whom the report of Munde was first received, immediately brought the matter to the notice of the Superintendent of Police by Ex. P-5 and the District Superintendent of Police moved the Additional District Magistrate, Saugor, to depute a first class Magistrate to hold Magisterial enquiry under the Police Manual. Mr. Banerjee, Magistrate, first class, was then deputed to hold the inquiry and in the course of it he examined Munde at the Main Hospital, Saugor, on 17th May 1939. The accused Parmanand, Ishwari Prasad and Barelal were not present on 17th May 1939 when Munde was examined, but they were given an opportunity to cross-examine him on 20th of May 1939 after they were made aware of the examination-in chief that was recorded on 17th May 1939. Ex. P-6 is the deposition of Munde given by him on oath before Mr. Banerjee and the first information report given by Munde is Ex. P. 2 in the case.
3. After investigation the accused Parmanand, Ishwari Prasad, Barelal, Babulal, Bhaiyalal, Janu and Roopsing were committed to the Sessions to stand their trial under Section 302 read with Section 34, or in the alternative, under Section 331 read with Section 34, I.P.C. for having caused the death of Munde by causing injury to him with the common object of extracting confession of theft from him. The accused Parmanand and Ishwari Prasad were further charged for two offences u
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.