State of U.P. Vs. Chandra & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 1467 of 1995
With
Crl. A. Nos. 135-136 of 1997
With
Crl. A. Nos. 135-136 of 1997
Petitioner: State of U.P.
Respondent: Chandra & Ors.
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 1467 of 1995
With
Crl. A. Nos. 135-136 of 1997
With
Crl. A. Nos. 135-136 of 1997
Judges: Dr. A.S. ANAND, CJI, R.C. LAHOTI & ARIJIT PASAYAT, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Oct 30, 2001
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAW
Indian Penal Code, 1860
a) Sections 302/34 with Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 3, 45 – Murder – Evidence of two eye-witnesses duly corroborated by medical evidence – Participation duly established – No wrong appreciation of evidence – No wrong application of law. Held that conviction was proper. Appeal dismissed. (Para 4)
b) Sections 302/34 with Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 378 – Appeal against acquittal – Murder case – Two out of 5 accused acquitted by High Court by giving benefit of doubt – Statement by eye-witness improved – Attempt to bring statement in line with medical evidence – Two accused alleged to be armed with ‘ballams’ but stated to have used them like lathis – Nature of injuries not possible by use of ballams – High Court finding it to be an infirmity. Held that reasoning of High Court is sound and is not perverse. Appeal by state against acquittal dismissed. (Para 5)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Five persons, namely, Chandra, Laxmi Narain, Kamlesh, Dhani Ram and Krishna were sent up for trial for offences under section 302/149 & 148 IPC in connection with the murder of Ghasita and his son Nathu on 14th March, 1989. Ram Prakash, another son of deceased Ghasita lodged the first information report, exhibit K-1 and appeared as P.W.-1 at the trial while another eye-witness Binda appeared as P.W.-2. The trial court, after recording evidence, vide judgment dated 7th May, 1983 sentenced all the accused persons to death for offences under section 302/149 & 148 IPC. The convicts filed appeals against their conviction and sentence in the High Court. On 5th July, 1994, the High Court set aside the conviction of Laxmi Narain – R-2. Kamlesh – R-3 and Krishna – R-5 under section 302/149 and 148 IPC and instead convicted them under section 302 read with section 34 I.P.C. and reduced their sentence from death to life imprisonment. Chandra – R-1 and Dhani – R-4 were acquitted. Reference for confirmation of death sentence was rejected.
2. The special leave petition filed by state seeking leave to appeal against reduction of death sentence of R-2, R-3 and R-5 and acquittal of R-1 and R-4 was considered by this Court. While SLP seeking enhancement of sentence of R-2, R-3 and R-5 was dismissed, leave was granted insofar as acquittal of R-1 and R-4 is concerned. R-3 and R-5 also filed appeals (Crl.A. Nos. 135-136/97) by special leave against their conviction and sentence. Laxmi Narain – R-2, however, has not questioned his conviction and sentence. This order will dispose of Crl. A. No. 1467/95 and Crl. Appeal Nos. 135-136/97.
3. We have heard Mr. Devesh Singh, learned counsel for the state, Mr. N.P. Midha, learned counsel for R-1 and R-4 and Mr. L.K. Pandey, learned counsel appearing as amicus for R-3 and R-5.
4. We have perused the judgment of the trial court and the High Court and with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties have been taken through the relevant record. Insofar as Kamlesh – R-3 and Krishna – R-5, the appellants in Crl. A. Nos. 135-136/97, are concerned, in our opinion the appreciation of evidence both by the trial court and the High Court is most appropriate. A bare perusal of first information report and the evidence of P.W. -1 and P.W. -2, the two eye-witnesses, clearly goes to establish their participation in the assault of both the deceased. Medical evidence provided by P.W. – 3 lends ample corroboration to the testimonies of P.W. – 1 and P.W. – 2 insofar as Kamlesh and Krishna are concerned. Nothing has been brought to our notice from which any inference may be possibly drawn of any mis-appreciation of evidence or wrong application of law by either the trial court or the High Court insofar as the guilt of these two appellants is concerned. The appeals against conviction and sentence filed by these two appellants are, accordingly, dismissed.
5. Coming now to the appeal filed by the state against acquittal of Chandra and Dhani, the High Court has, while recording acquittal of these two respondents, taken note of the fact that PW-1, the ace eye-witness of the prosecution tried to improve his case at the trial by bringing in his testimony in accord with medical evidence in as much as he deposed at the trial, after noticing the absence of any pointed weapon injury on the deceased in the medical evidence, that these two respondents had used their ballams (spears) ‘like lathis’. The High Court referred to the medical evidence and found that the nature of injuries sustained by the deceased could not be attributed to the use of ballam. The High Court, being of the opinion that the attempt made by the eye-witnesses to improve their evidence to bring it in line with the medical evidence was an infirmity which rendered it unsafe to rely upon them as to the two respondents-Chandra and Dhani Ram, gave benefit of doubt to both of them and acquitted them. The reason given by the High Court is sound. It does not suffer from any perversity. It is a reasonable view of the evidence. Our independent analysis of the evidence also shows that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the two respondents beyond a reasonable doubt. Under these circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal of Chandra and Dhani Ram-respondents. Consequently, crl. appeal no. 1467 of 1995 also fails and is dismissed.
6. As a result, all the three appeals fail and are dismissed.
1. Five persons, namely, Chandra, Laxmi Narain, Kamlesh, Dhani Ram and Krishna were sent up for trial for offences under section 302/149 & 148 IPC in connection with the murder of Ghasita and his son Nathu on 14th March, 1989. Ram Prakash, another son of deceased Ghasita lodged the first information report, exhibit K-1 and appeared as P.W.-1 at the trial while another eye-witness Binda appeared as P.W.-2. The trial court, after recording evidence, vide judgment dated 7th May, 1983 sentenced all the accused persons to death for offences under section 302/149 & 148 IPC. The convicts filed appeals against their conviction and sentence in the High Court. On 5th July, 1994, the High Court set aside the conviction of Laxmi Narain – R-2. Kamlesh – R-3 and Krishna – R-5 under section 302/149 and 148 IPC and instead convicted them under section 302 read with section 34 I.P.C. and reduced their sentence from death to life imprisonment. Chandra – R-1 and Dhani – R-4 were acquitted. Reference for confirmation of death sentence was rejected.
2. The special leave petition filed by state seeking leave to appeal against reduction of death sentence of R-2, R-3 and R-5 and acquittal of R-1 and R-4 was considered by this Court. While SLP seeking enhancement of sentence of R-2, R-3 and R-5 was dismissed, leave was granted insofar as acquittal of R-1 and R-4 is concerned. R-3 and R-5 also filed appeals (Crl.A. Nos. 135-136/97) by special leave against their conviction and sentence. Laxmi Narain – R-2, however, has not questioned his conviction and sentence. This order will dispose of Crl. A. No. 1467/95 and Crl. Appeal Nos. 135-136/97.
3. We have heard Mr. Devesh Singh, learned counsel for the state, Mr. N.P. Midha, learned counsel for R-1 and R-4 and Mr. L.K. Pandey, learned counsel appearing as amicus for R-3 and R-5.
4. We have perused the judgment of the trial court and the High Court and with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties have been taken through the relevant record. Insofar as Kamlesh – R-3 and Krishna – R-5, the appellants in Crl. A. Nos. 135-136/97, are concerned, in our opinion the appreciation of evidence both by the trial court and the High Court is most appropriate. A bare perusal of first information report and the evidence of P.W. -1 and P.W. -2, the two eye-witnesses, clearly goes to establish their participation in the assault of both the deceased. Medical evidence provided by P.W. – 3 lends ample corroboration to the testimonies of P.W. – 1 and P.W. – 2 insofar as Kamlesh and Krishna are concerned. Nothing has been brought to our notice from which any inference may be possibly drawn of any mis-appreciation of evidence or wrong application of law by either the trial court or the High Court insofar as the guilt of these two appellants is concerned. The appeals against conviction and sentence filed by these two appellants are, accordingly, dismissed.
5. Coming now to the appeal filed by the state against acquittal of Chandra and Dhani, the High Court has, while recording acquittal of these two respondents, taken note of the fact that PW-1, the ace eye-witness of the prosecution tried to improve his case at the trial by bringing in his testimony in accord with medical evidence in as much as he deposed at the trial, after noticing the absence of any pointed weapon injury on the deceased in the medical evidence, that these two respondents had used their ballams (spears) ‘like lathis’. The High Court referred to the medical evidence and found that the nature of injuries sustained by the deceased could not be attributed to the use of ballam. The High Court, being of the opinion that the attempt made by the eye-witnesses to improve their evidence to bring it in line with the medical evidence was an infirmity which rendered it unsafe to rely upon them as to the two respondents-Chandra and Dhani Ram, gave benefit of doubt to both of them and acquitted them. The reason given by the High Court is sound. It does not suffer from any perversity. It is a reasonable view of the evidence. Our independent analysis of the evidence also shows that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the two respondents beyond a reasonable doubt. Under these circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal of Chandra and Dhani Ram-respondents. Consequently, crl. appeal no. 1467 of 1995 also fails and is dismissed.
6. As a result, all the three appeals fail and are dismissed.
