SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Online)(SC) 45

SUPREME COURT
string, J
Banwari Ram and Others v. State of U.P.
Criminal Appeal No. 2478 of 1976 | Criminal Appeal No. 2587 of 1976 | Criminal Appeal No. 2823 of 1976



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: string
For the Respondents: string

The court affirmed that membership in an unlawful assembly holds all members liable for the collective actions, even if not all directly engaged in violent acts, establishing S.302/149 liability.

Headnote:(A) IPC - Sections 147, 148, 302/149, 307/149, 324/149, 326/149, 395/397, 120B, 427/149 - U.P. Pradeshik Armed Constabulary Act - Sections 6(b), 7(c), Defence of India Rules - Criminal appeals arising from convictions and acquittals in connection with a violent confrontation between Armed Constabulary personnel and Army during disarmament. (Paras 1, 4, 5, 6)

(B) Appeal against acquittal - Appellate court's powers in reversing acquittals - A sufficient appreciation of trial court's reasoning is required before overturning acquittal.

(C) Evidence - The prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were part of an unlawful assembly and their actions resulted in homicides.

Facts of the case:
Members of the Pradeshik Armed Constabulary revolted against Army personnel tasked with taking over an armory, resulting in significant fatalities on both sides during the confrontation.

Findings of Court:
The High Court's reversal of acquittal was justified as the evidence established the accused's liability as participants in the unlawful assembly that engaged in violent acts leading to multiple deaths.

Issues: Whether the High Court erred in reversing the acquittal of certain accused without adequate rationale; the sufficiency of evidence for the conviction under various IPC sections.

Ratio Decidendi: The High Court found that the assembly was unlawful and determined the prosecution had met its burden of proof regarding participation in violent acts leading to multiple fatalities; thus, the acquittal of some accused was reversed based on established membership and complicity in the unlawful acts of the assembly, validating the charges under S.302/149.

Result: Both the Criminal appeals are dismissed.

1 These two appeals arise out of the same Sessions Trial being Sessions Trial No. 332 of 1973 in the Court of Vth Additional and District Judge, Varanasi. The appellants are the members of Pradeshik Armed Constabulary belonging to the 5th battalion and their Headquarter was at Ramnagar. An unfortunate and unsavoury incident occurred on account of the decision of the State Government that the Army should take over charge of the armoury and magazines of the Provincial Pradeshik Armed Constabulary throughout Uttar Pradesh. It is on account of the aforesaid direction the forces belonging to the Pradeshik Armed Constabulary revolted and resisted the Army personnel from taking charge of the armoury and in furtherance of which 12 persons belonging to the Army were killed and 32 were injured. On account of the firing from the Army 4 persons belonging to the Pradesik Armed Constabulary were killed and some were injured. Ultimately, however, the direction of the State was implemented and the Army took charge of the armoury and other weapons. The incident occurred during the night of 21-5-1973 and continued for a fairly long period till 4.30 p.m. of 22-5-1973. On the basis of First Information Report given on 22nd May, 1973, at 7.30 p.m. a criminal case was instituted and a chargesheet was submitted against 44 accused persons including the appellants in these two appeals under S.147, 148, 302/149, 307/149, 324/149, 326/149, 395/397, 120B and 427/149, IPC and R.43(5) of the Defence of India Rules as well as under S.6(b) and 7(c). U.P. Pradeshik Armed Constabulary Act . Accused Banwari Ram, Ram Kirat Yadav, Hira Shanker Singh, Sheo Bahadur Yadav, Lal Babu Singh, Ramayan Singh, Indradeo Ram, Ramashanker Singh, Ram Nath Sharma, Lok Nath Singh and Tara Prasad Tewari were also charge sheeted under S.409, IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Varanasi and ultimately the accused persons were tried by the Vth Additional and District Judge, Varanasi.

2 The prosecution case in nutshell is that the members of the Armed Constabulary formed an Association which was not recognised by the State of U.P. The forces belonging to the Armed Constabulary who had been posted in the Lucknow University Campus became undisciplined and some untoward incidents happened there which compelled the State Government to take a decision to disarm the Armed Constabulary and give charge of the armoury and magazines hitherto under the charge of the Armed Constabulary to the Army in the entire State. When this decision was communicated by the I.G. of Police to the DIG of Police Varanasi range the said DIG had a telephonic talk with the Commissioner Shri A.K. Mustaf as the situation was going out of control and in accordance with the decision taken by the State Government to hand over the arms and ammunitions belonging to the Armed Constabulary to Army the local Administration at Varanasi requested the Army Commandant Lt. Col. S.K. Verma to provide Military assistance to take over the charge of the Armed Constabulary Quarter Guard and the Magazine at Ramnagar. The Army personnel discussed the matter with the civilian authorities chalked out a scheme of action and finally a contingent of army was sent to the Armed Constabulary Headquarter at Ramnagar under the leadership of Major C. S. Chima accompanied by a Magistrate First Class. They started the operation at 2.15 a.m. on 22nd May, 1973, and reached at the Try Junction of the road at Rambagh. The Magistrate then proceeded towards the Quarter Guard Building accompanied by the Company Commanders of the Armed Constabulary leaving their vehicles away on the road at a distance of 50 to 60 yards from Quarter Guard Building. Reaching near the Quarter Guard they found that apart from the Guards on duty there were 40 to 50 persons belonging to the Armed Constabulary and when the Commanders directed those people to hand over charge of the armoury to the Military, the Guards on duty






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top