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

2013 Supreme(SC) 330

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. Sathasivam & M.Y. Eqbal, JJ.
Lal Bahadur & Ors. - Appellant(s)
versus
State (NCT of Delhi) - Respondent(s)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1794 OF 2008
Decided On : 08-04-2013

IMPORTANT POINT
Appreciation of evidence, powers of appellate court.

Headnote:(a) Criminal Trial - Appreciation of evidence - Minor discrepancies are to be ignored - Especially so when the context so demands. (Paras 11 and 13)

        (1983) 3 SCC 217; (1999) 9 SCC 525 - Relied upon

        (b) Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 - Section 154 - FIR - Delay in lodgment - Delay of 2 days - In the aftermath of assassination of late Prime Minister when entire city was in turmoil - Accused persons being local and known to the complainant no prejudice caused to them by the delay - Not fatal. (Para 12)

        (c) Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 - Section 299 - Murder case - Non recovery of dead body - Not sine qua non for applicability of section 299. (Paras 14 and 21)

        (1981) 1 SCC 511; 1996 Crl.L.J. 2364; (1996) 8 SCC 250 - Relied upon

        (d) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 378 - Appeal against acquittal - High Court fully re-appreciating evidence and reversing trial courts order of acquittal - Based on sound reasoning - No infirmity. (Para 18)

        AIR 1961 SC 715 - Relied upon

        (e) Criminal Trial - Appreciation of evidence - Minor discrepancies and contradictions - Cannot be ground to brush aside the evidence - Eye witness account cannot be discarded merely because she is the widow of the deceased. (Para 19)

        (2011) 4 SCC 324; (2008) 17 SCC 587; (2008) 15 SCC 590; (2009) 11 SCC 334; (2010) 13 SCC 657 - Relied upon

       Facts of the case:

        Appellants were acquitted by the trial court.

        High Court reversed the judgment of the trial court and convicted the appellants and sentenced them variously,

       Finding of the Court:

        There is no infirmity in the impugned judgment.

       Result : Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 379 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 read with Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 against the judgment and order dated 27th August, 2008 passed by the Delhi High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1992 reversing the order of acquittal dated 31st October, 1990 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 12 of 1988 and convicting the appellants under Sections 147/149/449/436/302/395/396 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment and fine under different sections of IPC.

2. During the pendency of this appeal, appellant No. 4 Ram Lal is stated to have died on 23rd May, 2011. Therefore, the appeal stands abated so far as he is concerned.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that Harjit Kaur (PW-1), a resident of House No. RZ-1/295, Geetanjali Park, West Sagarpur, New Delhi, apprehensive of harm to her family because of riots which followed the assassination of late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on 31st October, 1984, had sent both her daughters and a son to her father Govind Singh’s house at BE-7, Hari Nagar, New Delhi. In her typed complaint (Ex. PW1/A) lodged on 7th November, 1984, she stated that a mob including appellant No. 1 Lal Bahadur alias Lal Babu along with appellant No. 2 Surender P. Singh and Charan, who lived in her neighbourhood, had attacked her house and looted household articles on 1st November, 1984 at about 9/9.30 a.m. Fearing threats of communal violence, the complainant Harjit Kaur and her family had taken shelter at the residence of Dr. Harbir Sharma (PW-5) who had his house opposite to that of the complainant and had remained there with her husband (Rajinder Singh) and father-in-law (Sardool Singh) for 2-3 days. On 3rd November, 1984, the appellants came to the house of Dr. Harbir Sharma in the morning and protested for having given shelter to the complainant’s family and threatened that if the complainant and her family to whom shelter had been given were not handed over to them, they would burn the house. Thereupon, Dr. Harbir Sharma went out to get help from the Military. At about 9.00 a.m., a mob of more than 500 persons, including the appellants, came and attacked the house of Dr. Harbir Sharma where the complainant was hiding with her husband and father-in-law. The appellants were having one cane of oil and iron sabbal and were leading the mob. As per the complainant, her husband and father-in-law had taken shelter in one of the room on the ground floor and locked themselves, while the family of Dr. Harbir Sharma and she herself had gone upstairs to the roof. At the time the mob was assembling, the complainant was present on the roof of one of the neighbours of Dr. Harbir Sharma whose house was in the same row. As per complainant’s testimony, the mob was armed with sabbals, ballams, sariyas and lathis. She stated that the appellants hit the door of the house with iron sabbals but the door could not be broken open. They thereupon broke the windowpane and entered the house and set the house on fire. The complainant’s husband and father-in-law were burnt alive and their half burnt bodies were put in gunny bags. The complainant’s house was also burnt. It is the prosecution’s case that Sushil Kumar (PW-4) (brother-in-law of Dr. Harbir Sharma), Dr. Harbir Sharma (PW-5), Jagdish (PW-6) and Mohar Pal (PW-7) also saw the house being set on fire and the deceased Rajinder Singh and Sardool Singh were being attacked with sabbals, burnt and their mortal bodies put into gunny bags. Sushil Kumar, on first seeing Dr. Sharma’s house being put on fire, had rushed to call Dr. Sharma who had gone to call the police. Both of them rushed back to find the house being burnt by the appellants and Sardoor Singh as well as Rajinder Singh were killed. They saw the appellants using dandas to put the bodies of the deceased in gu




















































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