text stringlengths 5 5.67k |
|---|
The third eye witness PW 1 Komal chand, however, supported the prosecution case in his examination in chief but in his cross examination he expressed some doubt regard ing the identity of the appellant and Guddu stating that he had seen their backs only. FAC |
The trial court came to the conclusion that not only was this witness a chance witness but his presence at the scene of occurrence was extremely doubtful as it was difficult to believe that he had come out at that hour to purchase vegetables. FAC |
Thus the trial court refused to place reliance on the evidence of the three eye witnesses. FAC |
The trial court, however, came to the conclusion that the appellant was absconding and that he had discovered the weapon 10 which was found to be stained with human blood. FAC |
It also relied on the factum of find of human blood on the pant worn by the appellant at the time of his arrest. FAC |
On the basis of this evidence the trial court convicted the appellant under section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. RLC |
Khujji preferred an appeal against the said conviction. FAC |
The High Court while ignoring the evidence of PW 3 Kishan Lal and PW 4 Ramesh relied on the evidence of PW 1 Komal Chand and came to the conclusion that his evidence clearly estab lished the presence of the appellant as one of the assail ants notwithstanding his effort in cross examination to wriggle out of his stateme... |
The High Court noticed that the examination in chief of this witness was recorded on November 16, 1976 whereas his cross examination commenced on December 15, 1976 i.e. after a month and in between he seemed to have been won over or had succumbed to threat. FAC |
This inference was drawn on the basis of PW 3 's statement that he was severely beaten on the night previous to his appearance in court as a witness. FAC |
The High Court, therefore, took the view that the subsequent attempt of PW 1 Komal Chand to create a doubt regarding the identity of the appellant was of no consequence since there was intrinsic material in his evidence to establish the presence of the appellant amongst the assailants of deceased Gulab. RLC |
Relying further on the discovery evidence as well as the find of human blood on the weapon found from the garage of the appellant and on his pant which he was wearing at the time of his arrest, the High Court came to the conclusion that his conviction was well founded and dismissed his appeal. FAC |
It may here be mentioned that the State did not prefer an appeal against the five companions of the appellant who came to be acquitted by the trial court. FAC |
It is in these circum stances that the appellant has invoked this Court 's jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. Ratio |
Mr. U.R. Lalit, learned counsel for the appellant, took us through the entire evidence and submitted that the prose cution version regarding the incident, particularly the involvement of the appellant, is highly doubtful since the correctness of the statement made in the first information report purporting to have been... |
Since the prosecution had declared both PW 3 Kishan Lal and PW 4 Ramesh as hostile to the prosecution the trial court was justified in refusing to rely on their evidence. Ratio |
He further submitted that the presence of PW 1 Komal Chand at the place of occurrence at that hour was highly doubtful and this doubt was reinforced by his conduct in not raising a hue and cry or going to the help of the victim. ARG |
The evidence 11 disclosed that this witness resides at a place almost two furlongs from the scene of occurrence and claims to have seen the incident from a distance of about 22 feet from a point wherefrom the incident could not have been witnessed by him as is evident from the physical condition of the locality describ... |
He, therefore,/ submitted that the trial court was justified in describing this witness as a chance witness and in doubting his presence at the scene of occurrence at the relevant point of time. ARG |
According to him the High Court committed an error in placing reliance on the testimony of this witness. ARG |
He, however, submitted that the trial court was not justi fied in recording the conviction on the mere fact that the appellant could not be found for two days and there was human blood on his weapon and pant attached in the course of investigation. ARG |
These two circumstances, contended counsel, constituted extremely thin and weak evidence to record a finding of guilt particularly when the trial Court had discarded the evidence of all the three eye witnesses and had doubted the contents of the first information report Exh. ARG |
Lastly he submitted that the High Court committed an error in brushing aside the statement made by PW 1 Komal Chand in his cross examination which went to show that his evidence regarding identity of the appellant was highly suspect. ARG |
Merely because there was a time gap between his examination in chief and his cross examination the High Court was not justified in jumping to the conclusion that the accused party had succeeded in winning him over by threat or otherwise. Ratio |
On this line of reasoning Mr. Lalit contended that the High Court ought not to have interfered with the appreciation of his evidence by the trial court. ARG |
Besides these submissions based on the evidence of the three eyewitnesses and the find of human blood on the weapon and pant of the appellant, Mr. Lalit further submitted that one set of Panch witnesses, PW 5 Pannalal and Rajinder (not examined), had been employed for all the discovery panchna mas as well as the attach... |
He, therefore, submitted that no reli ance could be placed on the evidence of PW 5 and consequent ly the find of human blood on the weapon and the pant looses its probative value. ARG |
In the end he submitted that the con viction of the appellant substantively under section 302 IPC was not well founded for the simple reason that not a single witness had deposed that the fatal injury was caused by the appellant. ARG |
The evidence of PW 12 Dr. Nagpal shows that the deceased had three injuries and out of them only injury No. 1 was by itself sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. ARG |
So far as injuries Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, the medical evidnce does not show that each one of them separately was sufficient in the ordinary 12 course of nature to cause death. ARG |
But the medical evidence is to the effect that all the three injuries taken collectively Were SuffiCient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Ratio |
In the absence of positive evidence that injury No. 1 was caused by the appellant and none else, his conviction substantively under section 302 cannot be sustained. Ratio |
In that case at best he can be convicted for hurt under Section 324, IPC further submitted that since his companions were acquitted and the State had not preferred any appeal against their acquittal he could not be convicted with the aid of sections 34 or 149 IPC. Ratio |
Mr. Prithvi Singh, the learned counsel for the State, submitted that the trial court was wrong in rejecting the evidence of PWs 3 and 4 merely because they were declared hostile as if their evidence was totally against the prose cution on that account. ARG |
He submitted that their evidence cannot be treated as effaced from the record merely because the prosecution chose to treat them as hostile on the limit ed question of identity of the assailants. ARG |
Their evidence as to the occurrence and number of persons involved in the commis sion of the crime can be relied upon along with that of PW 1 as he was neither a chance witness nor was he faking his presence at the scene of occurrence at the material time. Ratio |
His evidence regarding identity of the assailants is equally acceptable and his subsequent statement made in crossexami nation after a time gap of almost one month was rightly brushed aside by the High Court, whatever be the reason for his change of heart. Ratio |
With regard to the criticism regarding the absence of names of witnesses in the Inquest Report, counsel urged that it was not necessary in law to mention the names of the witnesses in the inquest report as the purpose of preparing the inquest report was merely to make a note of the physical condition of the body and th... |
On the ques tion of value to be attached to the evidence of the Panch witness PW 5, counsel submitted that nothing was alleged against this witness nor had the appellant given any expla nation regarding existence of human blood on the weapon and the pant attached from him in his statement recorded under section 313 of ... |
On the question regarding the offence committed by the appellant, counsel submitted that once it is proved that more than one person had participated in the assault, the appellant could be convicted for the murder of the deceased with the aid of section 34 or 149 IPC. ARG |
He, therefore, submitted that the appeal is without merit and deserves to be dismissed. ARG |
We have given our anxious consideration to the submis sions made by the learned counsel for the contesting parties. Ratio |
The fact that 13 an incident of the type alleged by the prosecution occurred on May 20, 1978 at about 8.20 p.m. is not seriously disputed nor is the location of the incident doubted. Ratio |
The evidence of PW 3 Kishan Lal and PW 4 Ramesh came to be rejected by the trial court because they were declared hostile to the prose cution by the learned Public Prosecutor as they refused to identify the appellant and his companions in the dock as the assailants of the deceased. Ratio |
But counsel for the State is right when he submits that the evidence of a witness, de clared hostile, is not wholly effaced from the record and that part of evidence which is otherwise acceptable can be acted upon. Ratio |
It seems to be well settled by the decisions of this Court Bhagwan Singh vs State of Haryana, ; ; Rabinder Kumar Dey vs State of Orissa, ; and Syed lqbal vs State of Karnataka, [1980] 1 SCR 95 that the evidence of a prosecution witness cannot be rejected in toto merely because the prosecution chose to treat him as host... |
The evidence of such witness es cannot be treated as effaced or washed off the record altogether but the same can be accepted to the extent their version is found to be dependable on a careful scrutiny thereof. Ratio |
In the present case the evidence of the aforesaid two eye witnesses was challenged by the prosecution in cross examination because they refused to name the accused in the dock as the assailants of the deceased. Ratio |
We are in agreement with the submission of the learned counsel for the State that the trial court made no effort to scrutinise the evidence of these two witnesses even in regard to the factum of the incident. Ratio |
On a careful consideration of their evi dence it becomes crystal clear that PW 4 had accompanied the deceased in PW 3 's rickshaw to the place of incident. Ratio |
In the incident that occurred at the location pointed out by the prosecution, PW 4 sustained an injury. Ratio |
His presence in the company of the deceased at the place of occurrence, there fore, cannot be doubted. Ratio |
Immediately after the incident within less than an hour thereof PW 4 went to the police station and lodged the first information report. Ratio |
It is true that the first information report is not substantive evi dence but the fact remains that immediately after the inci dent and before there was any extraneous intervention PW 4 went to the police station and narrated the incident. Ratio |
The first information report is a detailed document and it is not possible to believe that the investigating officer imagined those details and prepared the document Exh. Ratio |
The detailed narration about the incident in the first information report goes to show that the subsequent attempt of PW 4 to dis own the document, while admitting his signa ture thereon, is a shift for reasons best known to PW 4. Ratio |
We are, therefore, not prepared to accept the criticism that the version regarding the incident is the result of some fertile thinking on the part 14 Of the investigating officer. Ratio |
We are satisfied, beyond any manner of doubt, that PW 4 had gone to the police station and had lodged the first information report. Ratio |
To the extent he has been contradicted with the facts stated in the first information report shows that he has tried to resile from his earlier version regarding the incident. Ratio |
So also the presence of PW 3 at the scene of occurrence cannot be doubt ed once the presence of PW 4 is accepted. Ratio |
The trial court did not go so far as to say that both these witnesses were not present at the scene of occurrence or that PW 4 was not injured in the incident but refused to look into their evidence treating their evidence as non est on their ' being declared hostile by the prosecution. Ratio |
We think that the ap proach of the trial court insofar as the evidence of these two witnesses is concerned, is legally unacceptable. Ratio |
The High Court has not endeavoured to assess their evidence since it thought that the conviction of the appellant could be sustained on the evidence of PW 1 Komal Chand. Ratio |
We are satisfied on a close scrutiny of the evidence of the afore said two eyewitnesses, PWs 3 and 4, that the deceased and PW 4 came to the place of occurrence in the rickshaw pulled by PW 3. Ratio |
On reaching the spot where the incident occurred they were surrounded by certain persons who were lying in wait and a murderous assault was launched on them. Ratio |
The first to receive the injury was PW 4. Ratio |
When they gauged the intention of their assailants they jumped out of the rickshaw and both ran in different directions. Ratio |
The appellant first tried to chase PW 4 but later he turned to the deceased as he was informed by one of his companions Gopal that the person he was pursuing was not Gulab. Ratio |
Therefore, from the evidence of these two eye witnesses the fact that the deceased and PW 4 came to the place of occurrence in the rickshaw of PW 3 is established. Ratio |
So also the fact that on their reaching the place of occUrrence they were surrounded by some persons and an assault was launched on them in which PW 4 received an injury and Gulab died is clearly established. Ratio |
The only area where they have not supported the prosecution and have resiled from their earlier statements is regarding the identity of the assailants. Ratio |
We will deal with that part of the evidence a little later but the fact remains that the deceased had received three injuries as narrated by PW 12 Dr. Nagpal, to which he succumbed on the spot. Ratio |
Once these facts are accepted as proved, the only question which really survives for consideration is whether the appellant was an assailant of the deceased. Ratio |
That brings us to the evidence of PW 1 Komal Chand. Ratio |
Komal Chand 's evidence was not accepted by the trial court on the ground that he was not a natural witness and was only a chance witness. Ratio |
PW 1 explained his presence by stating that he had gone to the market to 15 purchase vegetables and while he was returning therefrom on foot with his cycle in hand he heard a commotion and saw the incident from a short distance. Ratio |
Being a resident of Suji Mohalla, the place of occurrence was clearly in the vicinity thereof and, therefore, his presence at the market place could not be considered to be unnatural. Ratio |
It is not unnatural for working people to purchase vegetables at that hour and, therefore, his explanation regarding his presence cannot be ruled out as false. Ratio |
The sketch map prepared by PW 11 Gaiser Prasad shows that he had seen the incident from a short distance of hardly 22 feet although PW 1 says he saw it from the square. Ratio |
Since the incident occurred at a public place with a lamp post nearby, the possibility of his having identified the assailants could not be ruled out. Ratio |
The exami nation i nchief of this witness was recorded on November 16, 1976 when he identified all the assailants by name. Ratio |
He stated that he knew the six accused persons in court and they were the persons who had surrounded the rickshaw and launched an assault on PW 4 and the deceased Gulab. Ratio |
Of them Gopal struck PW 4 with a chain. Ratio |
He also stated that the appellant Khujji and his companions Gudda and Parsu were armed with knives and when Khujji tried to assault PW 4 with a knife, Gopal shouted Khujji that man is not Gulab". Ratio |
There upon Khujji and his companions ran after the Gulab, overtook him and the appellant, Parsu and Gudda assaulted Gulab with their weapons. Ratio |
Gudda struck Gulab from the front on his chest, Parsu stabbed him on the side of the stomach while Ram Kishan and Gopal held him and the appellant attacked him from behind with a knife whereupon Gulab staggered shouting 'save save ' and fell in front of the house of Advocate Chintaman Sahu. Ratio |
Thereafter all the six persons ran away. Ratio |
His cross examination commenced on 15th December, 1978. Ratio |
In his crossexamination he stated that the appellant Khujji and Gudda had their backs towards him and hence he could not see their faces while he could identify the remaining four persons. Ratio |
He stated that he had inferred that the other two persons were the appellant and Gudda. Ratio |
On the basis of this statement Mr.Lalit submitted that the evidence regarding the identity of the appellant is rendered highly doubtful and it would be hazardous to convict the appellant solely on the basis of identification by such a wavering witness. Ratio |
The High Court came to the conclusion and, in our opinion rightly, that during the one month period that elapsed since the recording of his examination in chief something transpired which made him shift his evidence on the question of identi ty to help the appellant. Ratio |
We are satisfied on a reading of his entire evidence that his statement in cross examination on the question of identity of the appellant and his compan ion is a clear attempt to wriggle out of what he had stated earlier in his examination in chief. Ratio |
16 Since the incident occurred at a public place, it is reason able to infer that the street lights illuminated the place sufficiently to enable this witness to identify the assailants. Ratio |
We have, therefore, no hesitation in concluding that he had ample opportunity to identify the assailants of Gulab, his presence at the scene of occurrence is not unnat ural nor his statement that he had come to purchase vegata bles unacceptable:We do not find any material contradictions in his evidence to doubt his tes... |
He is a totally independent witness who had no cause to give false evidence against the appellant and his companions. Ratio |
We are, therefore, not impressed by the reasons which weighed that the trial court for rejecting his evidence. Ratio |
We agree with the High Court that his evidence is acceptable regarding the time, place and manner of the incident as well as the identity of the assailants. Ratio |
It was faintly submitted by counsel for the appellant that the evidence of eye witnesses could not be relied upon as their names did not figure in the inquest report prepared at the earliest point 'of time. Ratio |
We see no force in this submission in view of the clear pronouncement of this Court in Pedda Narain vs State of Andhra Pradesh, [1975] Supp.SCR 84. Ratio |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.