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

2009 Supreme(SC) 250

2009(2) Supreme 99
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Arijit Pasayat and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
State of U.P. — Appellant
versus
Sheo Lal & Ors. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 362-363 of 2002
Decided on : 12-02-2009

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant :Sahdev Singh, Mukesh Verma and Chandr aPrakash Pandey, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Irshad Ahmad, Arvind Kumar Shukla, G.D. Misra, Ashutosh Pathak, Peter Sungnem and Nihal, Advocates.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 323 read with Section 34 – Prosecution of accused persons for entering into house of deceased at night and inflicting injuries by means of lathis and knife causing death of deceased and injuries to another – Conviction by Trial Court – Appeal – High Court accepting defence version that motive was not established and accusations were also not established directed acquittal of accused persons – Appeal – Held High Court attached unnecessary importance to fact that one witness stated that assault continued for 8 to 10 minutes while another said it was around three minutes – The doctor’s evidence was discarded on the ground that his testimony was of poor quality and not inspired confidence – The judgment was full of contradictions – High Court at one place noticed that it was improbable that accused person who was cousin of PW 4 tried to molest her – In the same breath High Court in another place held that accused persons to molest PW 4 at a particular moment took her to the Arhar field and this was done with her prior consent – The absurdity of the High Court’s conclusions could be gauged from the fact that High Court found it unnatural that two girls of almost of the same age group were walking and as to why one of them would move ahead and the other would come behind was unnatural – So far as the High Court’s conclusions that there was non – mention of the source of light in the FIR accused persons were not strangers to the witnesses – They were closely related – The High Court’s judgment being unsustainable set aside and that of trial court restored – Appeals allowed. (Paras 6, 9 & 10)

       Facts of the Case :

       1.Accused persons were prosecuted herein in the instant case for entering into house of deceased at night and inflicting injuries by means of lathis and knife causing death of deceased and injuries to another. Trial Court convicted accused persons for said offences. On Appeal, High Court accepting defence version that motive was not established and accusations were also not established directed acquittal of accused persons.

       2.Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

       High Court attached unnecessary importance to fact that one witness stated that assault continued for 8 to 10 minutes while another said it was around three minutes. The doctor’s evidence was discarded on the ground that his testimony was of poor quality and not inspired confidence. The judgment was full of contradictions. High Court at one place noticed that it was improbable that accused person who was cousin of PW 4 tried to molest her. In the same breath High Court in another place held that accused persons to molest PW 4 at a particular moment took her to the Arhar field and this was done with her prior consent. The absurdity of the High Court’s conclusions could be gauged from the fact that the High Court found it unnatural that two girls of almost of the same age group were walking and as to why one of them would move ahead and the other would come behind was unnatural. So far as the High Court’s conclusions that there was non-mention of the source of light in the FIR accused persons were not strangers to the witnesses. They were closely related- The High Court’s judgment being unsustainable was set aside and that of trial court was restored.

       Result : Appeals allowed.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

1. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court directing acquittal of the respondents. By the impugned judgment two appeals were disposed of. The appellant-accused in each case had questioned correctness of the judgment rendered by learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur in ST Case Nos. 190 of 1979 and 212 of 1979. Each was convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’) respectively. Additionally, accused Surender was convicted for offence punishable under Section 354 IPC.

2. Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows:

In the evening of 20.3.1979 at about 6.00 pm Km. Sharmi (PW 4) was going to attend the call of nature. She was moving few steps ahead of Km. Munni. It is alleged that at the relevant moment Surendra and Suresh accosted Km. Sharmi. They told her to accompany them into Arhar field and with that intent they also held her hands. On the alarm raised by her Km. Munni rushed to her rescue. At this, both the accused persons took to their heels. On her return to the house, Km Sharmi (P.W.4) narrated the incident to her maternal uncle Krishanapal, the deceased in the incident, and Vijaypal (P.W.3). Both the brothers, went to the house of accused Sheo Lal, and made a complaint about the shameful behavior of his son and nephew. Having made the complaint they came back to their house.

The deceased, Krishnapal, and his brother Vijayapal were relaxing and smoking Bidis on the Chabutara, which abuts their house. A burning lantern was also hanging near the grass-cutting machine. A lamp was also burning at the main door of the house. At about 8.00 P.M. Sheo Lal accompanied by Suresh and Surendra came to the house of Krishanapal, deceased. Sheo Lal and Suresh were armed with Lathis and Surendra was armed with a knife. Immediately on their arrival near the deceased, they started hurling abuses and said that since they are maligning his family, inflicted lathi injuries upon the deceased and Surendra attacked him with knife. The hue and cry raised by the deceased attracted Ratipal (P.W1), Chandrapal (P.W.2), Km. Sharmi (P.W.4) and some other family members to the spot. Ratipal was also possessing a torch in his hand. Chandrapal was also attacked with lathis when he tried to intercede. He had sustained lathi injuries. As a result of the injuries sustained, Krishanapal fell down and died instantaneously. The accused persons withdrew thereafter.

The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Vijaypal (P.W.3). The written report is Ext. Ka.l. It was scribed by Rampal and was lodged at P.S. Bidhnoo at 11.15 P.M. He was accompanied to the police station by Ratipal, Chandrapal and Rampal. The chick is Ext. Ka. 2. It was prepared by P.W. Lallan Singh, Head Moharir.

Chandrapal (P.W.2) was sent from the police station to the Primary Health Center, Bidhnoo for medical examination of his injuries. He was escorted by constable Mahipal (P.W.5), for that purpose.

After completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. As the accused persons pleaded innocence trial was held. The trial court recorded conviction. As noted above separate appeals were filed by each one of the accused persons which were disposed of by the common judgment directing their acquittal. The stand of the accused appellant before the High Court was that the motive suggested is clearly unacceptable as the parties are inter-se related and it is improbable that the accused persons will tried to molest their cousin (PW 4) in the manner as alleged by the prosecution. It was submitted that the incident has not occurred in the manner alleged and the FIR was ante dated. The trial court placed reliance on the evidence of four eye witnesses PW 1 to PW4. The High Court noted that so far as the motive is concerned the only witness is PW 4. The High Court accepted the defence ve











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