2021 Supreme(SC) 380

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, M.R. SHAH, JJ.
Lakshman Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) – Respondent
With
Shiv Kumar Singh and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 606, 630-631 of 2021
Decided On : 23-07-2021

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Production of injury report for offence under Section 323 IPC is not a sine qua non for establishing case for offence under Section 323 IPC.
(2) Evidence of injured witnesses is entitled to a great weight and very cogent and convincing grounds are required to discard their evidence.
(3) Every member of unlawful assembly is guilty of offence of rioting even though he may not have himself used force or violence. Use of force, even though it be slightest possible character by any one member of assembly, once established as unlawful constitutes rioting. It is not necessary that force or violence must be by all but liability accrues to all members of unlawful assembly.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 323, 326, 147 and 148 – Booth capturing – Hurt and rioting – Conviction and sentence – Evidence of injured witnesses has greater evidentiary value and unless compelling reasons exist, their statements are not to be discarded lightly – Minor discrepancies do not corrode credibility of an otherwise acceptable evidence – Mere non-mention of name of an eyewitness does not render prosecution version fragile – In cases where there are large number of assailants, it can be difficult for witnesses to identify each assailant and attribute specific role to him – Where witness to occurrence was himself injured in incident, testimony of such witness is generally considered to be very reliable, as he is a witness that comes with an inbuilt guarantee of his presence at scene of crime and is unlikely to spare his actual assailant(s) in order to falsely implicate someone – Deposition of injured witness should be relied upon unless there are strong grounds for rejection of his evidence on basis of major contradictions and discrepancies therein – No reason to doubt credibility and/or trustworthiness of PWs and more particularly those who are injured witnesses – All witnesses are consistent in their statements and they have fully supported case of prosecution – No error has been committed by courts below for convicting accused under Section 323 IPC – So far as conviction of accused under Section 147 IPC is concerned, presence of all accused persons at the time of incident and their active participation has been established and proved by prosecution by examining independent witnesses and injured witnesses also – Accused persons belong to another village – All accused persons were members of unlawful assembly and common intention was to snatch voters slips and to cast bogus voting – They used force and violence also – Every member of unlawful assembly is guilty of offence of rioting even though he may not have himself used force or violence – Use of force, even though it be slightest possible character by any one member of assembly, once established as unlawful constitutes rioting – It is not necessary that force or violence must be by all but liability accrues to all members of unlawful assembly – Appellants rightly convicted under Sections 323 and 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment – Appeals dismissed. (Paras 6, 6.1, 6.2, 7, 8, 9, 9.1, 10 and 11)

(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 323 – Hurt – Production of injury report for offence under Section 323 IPC is not a sine qua non for establishing case for offence under Section 323 IPC – Section 323 IPC is a punishable section for voluntarily causing hurt – Even causing bodily pain can be said to be causing hurt. (Para 8)

Facts of the case:

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, for offences under Sections 323 and 147 IPC, appellants herein, original accused nos. 9, 8, 12, 11, 10, 14, 2 preferred appeal along with other accused being Criminal Appeal No.232 of 1999 and accused no. 13 preferred appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 242 of 1999 before High Court. By common impugned judgment and order, High Court has dismissed the said appeals and has confirmed judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by trial Court.

Findings of Court:

Election is a mechanism which ultimately represents the will of the people. The essence of the electoral system should be to ensure freedom of voters to exercise their free choice. Therefore, any attempt of booth capturing and/or bogus voting should be dealt with iron hands because it ultimately affects rule of law and democracy. Nobody can be permitted to dilute the right to free and fair election.

Result : Appeals dismissed.