HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
RAJNISH KUMAR, ZAFEER AHMAD, JJ.
Ram Pratap - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 522 of 1983, Criminal Appeal No. 529 of 1983, Criminal Appeal No. 543 of 1983, Criminal Appeal No. 544 of 1983
Decided On : 20-04-2026
JUDGMENT :
Zafeer Ahmad, J.
1. Heard, Sri Nagendra Mohan learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Shiv S.E. Chitambar, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Purnendu Chakravarty learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Pranjal Jain, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the records.
2. The aforesaid criminal appeals arises out of the common judgment and order dated 18.07.1983 passed by IIIrd Additional District & Session Judge, Pratapgarh in Session Trial No. 227 of 1982 (State v. Rama Pati Misra & Ors.) arising out of case crime no. 146 of 1982, Police Station Badhrai,Sub-District Kunda, District Pratapgarh, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (in short I.P.C.) r/w Section 149 I.P.C. for life imprisonment, under Section 325 I.P.C. r/w Section 149 I.P.C for one year of rigorous imprisonment, under Section 323 I.P.C r/w Section 149 I.P.C for six months rigorous imprisonment, under Section 201 I.P.C r/w 149 I.P.C for five years rigorous imprisonment. It has further been provided that appellant Ram Pratap has to undergo further sentence for one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 148 I.P.C..
3. Since all the aforesaid criminal appeals arise out of a common judgment and order dated 18.07.1983, as such same have been heard together and decided by a common order.
Prosecution Story in Nutshell:
4. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 05.09.1982 complainant Shyam Shankar Tripathi s/o Surya Narayan r/o Gogaur, Police Station Badhrai, District Pratapgarh submitted a written report stating therein that a land dispute was pending between the informant’s uncle, Chandra Prakash Tiwari, son of Mewalal Tiwari, and Ramapati and Salik Ram Agayara of his village, on account of which the accused persons were harbouring enmity against the deceased. On 05.09.1982 at around 6:00 P.M., while the deceased was sitting at his door and talking to Salik Ram Pradhan and Pati Ram Upadhyay, Radhe Krishna s/o Ram Khelawan came and called him on the pretext that a peon from the Tehsil was calling for him. Thereafter when he reached the southern road near the house of Ram Khelawan, he was surrounded by Ramapati Mishra, Salik Ram Misra, Ram Khelawan, and Triveni Prasad Mishra (sons of Devata Din), Ram Khelawan (son of Suraj Din), Ram Asray Radhe Shyam, Radhey Mohan and Randhey Krishna (sons of Ram Khelawan), Mithlesh Kumar, Dhirendra Kumar and Rakesh Kumar (sons of Salik Ram) and Om Prakash (son of Triveni Prasad), who caught hold of him and started assaulting him with lathis. On hearing the cries of the deceased, the complainant along with his father Suryanarayan, Dhruv Prakash, Satya Prakash, Salik Ram (Pradhan), Pati Ram Upadhyay, Jagan , Jagdev, his two aunts (chachi) and one paternal aunt (bua) reached the spot and attempted to intervene but the accused persons threatened them of dire consequences and prevented them from rescuing the deceased. It is alleged that even the women, who tried to shield the deceased, were assaulted and forcibly pushed aside. It is further stated that Ram Pratap, brother-in-law of Ram Asrey, who was present at the spot with other associates, threatened the witnesses with firearms, due to which they could not come near. The accused persons continued to beat the deceased with lathis in the presence of the witnesses, as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries. It is also alleged that the accused persons attempted to conceal the dead body.
5. On the basis of the written report, an F.I.R was registered by Head Moharrir Irshad Ahmad and the corresponding GD entry was also made. The investigation of the case was entrusted to S.I. Raj Deo Yadav, who proceeded to the place of occurrence and reached there at around 1:45 A.M. on 06.09.1982. Upon arrival, the dead body was not found at the alleged place of occurrence; however, after a brief search, the same was recovered from the field of Gaya Prasad. Owing to insufficient light, the






The court affirmed the conviction of the accused for murder, finding sufficient evidence of an unlawful assembly and individual culpability amid claims of inconsistencies in prosecution testimony.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on the established common object of the unlawful assembly, supported by credible witness testimonies and medical evidence.
Point of law: In the absence of such finding as also any overt act on the part of the accused persons, mere fact that they were armed would not be sufficient to prove common object.
Prosecution must substantiate charges with reliable evidence; significant discrepancies in witness statements and medical evidence warrant acquittal.
In cases of unlawful assembly leading to murder, all involved members can be held vicariously liable, and eyewitness testimonies must be credible even if witnesses are related to the victim.
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.