text
stringlengths
5
5.67k
The husband lived in a village Kalawad which is three miles distant. FAC
At the time of the murder arrangements were being made for Sunder to go to her husband and preparations for the ceremonial appropriate to such occasions were in the course of progress. FAC
Both Courts hold that the motive is proved; and that can be accepted. FAC
Next comes the evidence about the sharpening of the axe on the evening of the 18th at Kana 's house in the village Shiva. FAC
The axe was produced in Court and Dewayat (P.W. 5) tells us that it was blunt. FAC
Now there is nothing suspicious or unusual in a villager sharpening a blunt axe and, as we have pointed out, Meraman (P.W. 11) says that Dewayat was also sharpening an axe at the same time and place; and Dewayat is one of the other three against whom suspicion was directed; also, the fact that the axe was sharpened in ...
But the prosecution do not rely on this alone. FAC
Their witnesses say that when the appellant was asked why he was sharpening his axe (Dewayat does not seem to have been put a similar question though he was doing the same thing) he replied that he wanted to offer a green coconut to Lord Shanker. FAC
All the witnesses are agreed that this has no special significance and that they attributed no sinister meaning to it at the time. FAC
It has acquired significance only in the light of after events. FAC
Even here, there seems to us to be some danger that what the appellant really said has got mixed up, with what these witnesses say and, no doubt, honestly believe he said. Ratio
We say this because Sunder, P.W. 3, and her mother Vali, P.W. 2 tell us that the appellant came to the mother that evening and offered her eight annas in lieu of a coconut. Ratio
It seems that this is a customary offering given by relatives when a daughter leaves her parents ' home for her father in law 's place. Ratio
A reasonable doubt arises and the appellant is entitled to its benefit. Ratio
Next comes the evidence of Samant, P.W. 16, who says that be saw the appellant that night on the outskirts of Kalawad where the murder was committed. Ratio
He was wearing a false beard and a mask. Ratio
But that is the very question that the Court has to decide. Ratio
The only fact that this witness can be said to prove is that be saw a man that night wearing a false beard and mask who looked like the appellant. Ratio
Then we come to the recoveries. Ratio
The false beard and mask were found buried in the grounds of Dewayat 's house and the appellant is said to have recovered them in the presence of panchas. Ratio
But those discoveries are inadmissible in evidence because the police already knew where they were hidden. Ratio
Their information was not derived from the appellant but from Dewayat (one of the other suspects). Ratio
The way the police came to find this out was this. Ratio
Dewayat says that the appellant confessed the murder to him and told him that he had gone there wearing a false beard and a mask and that he had buried these articles 1295 under the Shami tree in the grounds of Dewayat 's bada. FAC
Dewayat says "Next the police called me to go to Kalawad. FAC
At that time Raja had been arrested. . FAC
I was interrogated. FAC
I spoke about the beard at that time. FAC
Then the police came to my field with Raja". FAC
If Meraman (P. W. 11), read with the Confused statement of Kana (P.W. 4), is to be believed, Dewayat was also under arrest either at the time or on the day before. Ratio
As the Sub Inspector was not examined, we are unable to clear this up and so are bound to give weight to the criticism of the Sessions Judge where he says "However, Dewayat confesses that his statement was not recorded on the 19th of May 1952 but was recorded on 20 5 1952 only after he was questioned by the police". Ra...
In our opinion, not only is this evidence about recovery not admissible but the danger that Samant (P.W. 16) mistook Dewayat, who was also under strong suspicion, or someone else who looked like the appellant, for the appellant, has not been excluded. Ratio
Lastly, there is the recovery of the axe. Ratio
But this was not hidden. Ratio
It was kept behind an earthen jar in the appellant 's house just as an axe might be normally kept in any average household. Ratio
The only point of suspicion is that the axe had stains of human blood on it. Ratio
But the difficulty we are faced with there is that the extent of the stains and their position is not disclosed. Ratio
We have had occasion to comment before on the very slovenly and ineffective way in which some Chemical Analysers do their duty. Ratio
This is another case in which what might otherwise have been a valuable piece of evidence has to be disregarded. Ratio
The axe was not recovered till the 21st and was standing where it could have been handled by other members of the household. Ratio
In any case, villagers frequently have slight cuts or scratches or a prick from a thorn on their persons and a few drops of blood could easily be transferred to an article like an axe without anybody noticing or knowing. Ratio
The important thing in a case like this, where everything 1296 is now seen to hang on this one fact, would be the extent of the blood and its position. Ratio
The postmortem reveals that the injuries were incised and that the bleeding was profuse. Ratio
When everything hangs on this one point, we cannot assume without proof that stains which might be compatible with either guilt or innocence must have been of what we might term the guilty kind. Ratio
On a careful examination of the evidence in this case, we are not satisfied that the circumstances disclose "strong and compelling reasons" to set aside the acquittal. Ratio
The appeal is allowed. Ratio
The conviction and sentence are set aside and the appellant is acquitted. RPC
VENKATARAMA AYYAR J. RPC
I regret I am unable to agree with the judgment just delivered. Ratio
The appellant belonged to the village of Katkora, and developed intimacy with an unmarried woman called Sunder in the neighboring village of Shiva. Ratio
Subsequently, Sunder was married to one Jetha of Kalawad, a village about 3 miles distant from Shiva. Ratio
It had been arranged to take Sunder to her husband 's house on the 19th May 1952, and for that purpose, Sida, the father of Jetha, had come to Shiva on the 18th. Ratio
The case of the prosecution was that the appellant was determined to prevent Sunder from joining her husband, and with that object he went to Kalawad on the night of the 18th, and killed Jetha with his axe, when be was asleep. Ratio
The murder came to light next morning, and the matter was reported to the police. Ratio
The appellant was arrested on 20 5 1952. Ratio
On his information the police recovered from his house at Katkora an axe, and the panchnama discloses that it then bad stains of blood which was subsequently found by the Chemical Analyst to be human. Ratio
The appellant next showed to the police 1297 a false beard, which was buried under a tree in the village of Shiva. Ratio
It is alleged that this was worn by the appellant at the time of the murder. Ratio
The Magistrate, however, decided to give him time "to cool down", and put him in judicial lock up. Ratio
He then went on duty to another place, and on his return, recorded the confession of the appellant, which is as follows: " I, having gone to his Wadi, have killed him. FAC
I have killed him with axe. FAC
I have killed him for the sake of Sunderbai. FAC
Sunderbai is the wife of Jetha. FAC
I had illicit connection with her. FAC
I have murdered Jetha Sida with the idea of marrying Sunderbai. FAC
I gave him an axe blow on the neck. FAC
At that time I had put on a tunic and a pair of trousers. FAC
I bad a turban on my head. FAC
I had worn artificial beard. FAC
After the murder, the artificial beard buried in the field of Dewanand Mope. FAC
I took the axe to my house". FAC
The appellant retracted this confession before the Committing Magistrate, as made under police beatings and threats. Ratio
He was then sent up to the Sessions Court, Halar, to take his trial, which took place with the aid of four assessors. Ratio
There was no direct evidence that the appellant had committed the murder. Ratio
The circumstantial evidence on which the prosecution sought to establish his guilt consisted of a confession made by him to the Magistrate, the recovery of the axe and the false beard, and the existence of strong motive. Ratio
There was, besides, a considerable body of evidence that on the 18th May the appellant was haunting the village of Shiva where Sunder was residing, with an axe in his hand and threats in his tongue. Ratio
The assessors were unanimously of the opinion that the appellant was guilty, but the Sessions Judge disagreed with them, and held that the confession was neither true nor voluntary, and that though there were strong grounds for suspecting him, the evidence was not sufficient to convict him, and so acquitted him. Ratio
There was an appeal against this judgment by the 1298 State to the High Court of Saurashtra. Ratio
The learned Judges, differing from the Sessions Judge, held that the confession was true and voluntary, that there was ample corroboration thereof in the evidence, and that even apart from it, the other facts proved by 'the prosecution were sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellant. Ratio
They accordingly set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge, convicted the appellant under section 302 and sentenced him to transportation for life. Ratio
It is against this judgment that the present appeal by special leave has been brought. Ratio
The question is whether having regard to the principles on which this Court exercises its jurisdiction under article 136, there are grounds for interference in this appeal. Ratio
Those principles are well settled and may briefly be recapitulated. Ratio
Prior to the abolition of the jurisdiction of the Privy Council, the law of this country did not in general provide for appeals against judgments of the High Courts in criminal matters. Ratio
Indeed, the policy of the legislature as expressed in sections 404 and 430 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and departing in this respect from that adopted in the Civil Procedure Code, has been that decisions of courts passed in criminal appeals should be final and subject to specified exceptions, not open to a furthe...
So far as judgments of the High Courts are concerned, the limitation on further appeal imposed by the Indian statutes could not affect the jurisdiction of the Privy Council to entertain appeals against them in the exercise of the prerogative of the Crown. Ratio
That was a power which the Privy Council possessed in respect of orders passed by the courts all over the Dominions, and the limits within which the Judicial Committee exercised that power were thus stated by Lord Watson in In re Abraham Mallory Dillett(1): "The rule has been repeatedly laid down, and has been invariab...
These principles were followed in quite a number of appeals against judgments of Indian courts in criminal matters. Ratio
In Dal Singh vs King Emperor(1), the Privy Council, stating the practice of the Judicial Committee in dealing with an appeal in a criminal case., observed: "The general principle is established that the Sovereign in Council does not act, in the exercise of the prerogative right to review the course of justice in crimin...
A mere mistake on the part of the Court below. Ratio
Such questions are, as a general rule, treated as being for the final decision of the Courts below". Ratio
In Taba Singh vs Emperor(2) , Lord Buckmaster observed that the responsibility for the administration of criminal justice rested with the courts in India, and that the Board would not interfere "unless there has been some violation of the principles of justice or some disregard of legal principles". PRE
In George Gfeller vs The King(3), which was an appeal from the Supreme Court of Nigeria, Sir George Rankin observed: "Their Lordships have repeated ad nauseam the statement that they do not sit as a Court of Criminal Appeal. PRE
For them to interfere with a criminal sentence there must be something so irregular or so outrageous as to shock the very basis of justice: per Lord Dunedin in Mohindar Singh vs Emperor(4). PRE
Muhammad Nawaz vs Emperor(5) (1) [1917] L.R. 44 I.A. 187, 140. PRE
(2) [1924] I.L.R. (3) A.I.R. 1943 P.C. 211. PRE
(4) [1932] L.R. 59 I.A. 233, 235. PRE
(5) [1941] L.R. 68 I.A. 126, 129. PRE
164 1300 On these principles, the Privy council refused in Macrea, Ex parts(1) leave to appeal on the ground of misdirection to the jury and in Mohindar Singh vs Emperor '(2)on the ground that a wrong view had been taken of the law. PRE
Thus, the law was well settled that the Privy Council would not entertain appeals against judgments in criminal cases, unless there was an error of . Ratio