2018 (12) TMI 2003
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....harge of Matihani Police Station at 9.00 p.m. on 05.01.1984. He stated that along with his brother Md. Nadir Sah @ Jumma (deceased), he had gone to the house of Md. Mobin (PW-4) for collecting irrigation dues. They were basking by the ghura (fire place) at Md. Mobin's darwaza. A mob of 10-11 persons armed with pistols, rifles and gun came there at that time. The informant identified seven out of eleven persons. Md. Chamru @ Sahadat was armed with gun, Noor Alam with rifle, Md. Jam Alam (Appellant No. 4) with gun and Md. Kari @ Akhtar (Appellant No. 1), Md. Samad and Md. Sanjat (Appellant No. 3) also had fire arms. Immediately after the mob reached, the Accused Md. Chamru@ Sahadat warned that nobody should try to escape and then Md. Sanjat (Appellant No. 3) fired one shot which did not hit anybody. The informant, Md. Nadir Sah @ Jumma (deceased) and Md. Mobin (PW-4) started running and all the Accused chased them. The informant hid himself by the side of a Simal tree from where he saw his brother Md. Nadir Sah @ Jumma (deceased) being surrounded by the Accused near the southern wall of the house of one Samshul. After being surrounded, the deceased Md. Nadir Sah @Jumma was shot d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s who were examined by the Prosecution, PWs-3, 4 and 6 were the eye witnesses. PW-3 deposed that he heard the sound of firing near the house of Samshul when he was returning from Ghasarpur Tola and saw seven Accused who were chasing the deceased Md. Nadir Sah @ Jumma, Md. Abu Daud (PW-6) and Md. Mobin (PW-4). Accused-Md. Jam Alam, Md. Sahadat and Noor Alam had fired at the deceased near the house of Samshul. He stated that he identified the Accused by flashing his torch light. According to him, the police arrived at the place of the incident at 9.00 p.m. He testified that he did not tell anybody about the incident till the police reached there. PW-4 stated in his evidence that he arranged a ghura (fireplace) with leaves at 6.00 p.m. on 05.01.1984. Md. Abu Daud (PW-6) and Md. Nadir Sah @ Jumma (deceased) who came to demand the remaining irrigation dues from him also sat near the ghura. At that time a mob of 11 persons suddenly came there. He could identify seven out of eleven persons in mob in the light of ghura and of lantern which was hanging in the oriyani (veranda). He further deposed that he, the deceased, and PW-6 started running away from the mob. The deceased was surrounded ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the inquest report and the dead body challan were prepared later at the police station. An adverse inference was drawn against the Prosecution. The trial court also took note of the presence of the Mangal Tanti, the Chowkidar of the village, who reached the place of the incident in 30 minutes after the incident took place. He was not examined as a witness. None of the witnesses deposed that they informed the Chowkidar about the incident. No independent witness was examined though the village was hardly 200 metres from the place of the incident. No pellet or traces of bullets were recovered from the place of the incident. On the basis of the above findings along with other contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses, the trial court acquitted the Appellants of all the charges against them. 7. The Appeals filed by the State and the revision filed by the complainant, were taken altogether. The High Court appreciated the evidence and found fault with the judgment of the trial court. The High Court felt that apart from minor inconsistencies, the evidence of the eye witnesses was reliable and there was sufficient light to identify the Accused. The Accused shared a common intenti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. v. State of Karnataka (2014) 5 SCC 730 (i-iv) referred to several earlier judgments dealing with appeals against acquittals and observed that the appellate court must bear in mind the following: 12. ... (i) There is presumption of innocence in favour of an Accused person and such presumption is strengthened by the order of acquittal passed in his favour by the trial court; (ii) The Accused person is entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt when it deals with the merit of the appeal against acquittal; (iii) Though, the powers of the appellate court in considering the appeals against acquittal are as extensive as its powers in appeals against convictions but the appellate court is generally loath in disturbing the finding of fact recorded by the trial court. It is so because the trial court had an advantage of seeing the demeanour of the witnesses. If the trial court takes a reasonable view of the facts of the case, interference by the appellate court with the judgment of acquittal is not justified. Unless, the conclusions reached by the trial court are palpably wrong or based on erroneous view of the law or if such conclusions are allowed to stand, they are likely to r....