Rambilas & Ors Vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh [1997] INSC 764 (3 October 1997)
M.M.
PUNCHHI, S.P. KURDUKAR
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
S.P.
KURDUKAR, J.
The
High Court as well as the Sessions Court by their concurrent judgments held the
appellants in all these criminal appeals guilty of committing the murder of one
Deosharan & Devsaran
s/o Bigen and convicted them under Sections 302 and
201 IPC and sentenced each one of them to suffer imprisonment for life on first
count and two years' RI on second count. Substantive sentences were ordered to
run concurrently. These appeals have been filed by the appellants (convicts)
through jail.
(2) Deosharan (since deceased) hailed from village Chirmari and at the relevant time he was staying at the
house of Rambilas & Vilas (A-5). Deosharan was said to be a notorious person and was adicted to liquor and womanizer too. He was said to have
married four times and has even eloped with the wife of A-5 for a short period
and after returning started living with A-5 only. It was alleged that there was
a dispute between Deosharan and his father Bigen (P.W.1) on one hand and Samarsai
(Bigen's nephew) on the other. The occurrence took
place on 3.5.1985 and on that day "Ganga Dashara" a festival was being celebrated in the said
area.
he occurrence in question took place late in the evening at about 10.30
p.m. On
this festival occasion villagers drink and dance during the night. It is
alleged by the prosecution that at about 10.30 p.m. some of the villagers heard
the noise of sticks during marpeet and because of
this noise the prosecution witnesses, namely, Devsai
(P.W>2), Sitaram (P.W.3), Sukhnath
(P.W.5), Suddhooram (P.W.6) and one Ramdin woke up from the sleep and went in the direction of Pondi Bathan Dad from where the
noise of marpeet was coming. These eye witnesses
claimed to have seen the actual assault caused by the appellants on Deosharan. All these eye witnesses requested the appellants
to spare Deosharan but however, the appellants
prohibited them from going near the place where marpeet
was going on and threatened them saying that if they feel their lives are
precious, go away from the said place. These eye witnesses further claimed that
the appellants told them that they had finished Deosharan.
The eye witnesses who were unarmed returned to they village and broke the news
and also went to the house of Sarpanch to apprise him
about the incident. The witnesses and some other villagers thereafter went to
the place of occurrence but they did not see the appellants as well as the dead
body of Deosharan. After returning to the village
next day morning these eye witnesses contacted Bigen
(P.W.1) and informed him about the incident. The FIR was accordingly lodged.
During interrogation Bahadur (A-2) made a statement
which led to the discovery of the dead body which had been thrown into the
tank. The dead body of Deosharan was fished out and
after holding the autopsy on the dead body it was sent for post mortem
examination. The other accused persons were also arrested during investigation.
After completing the necessary investigation a charge-sheet came to be filed
against the appellants under Sections 302 and 201 IPC.
(3)
The appellants denied to have committed any offence and pleaded that they are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present crime.
(4) At
the trial prosecution examined as may as 13 witnesses of whom P.W.2, P.W.3,
P.W.5 and P.W.6 claimed to be eye witnesses. The memorandum of disclosure
statements of various accused persons prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence
Act during investigation and the recoveries of various incriminating articles
made pursuant thereto were also relied upon to bring home the guilt of the
accused.
(5) We
have very carefully gone through the judgments of both the courts below and
with respect we find that notwithstanding the concurrent judgments thereof we
are unable to sustain the convictions of the appellants on any count. It is
well settled that this Court would be slow to interfere with the findings of
facts recorded by the Courts below which are based on appreciation of evidence
but we are of the considered view that the Sessions Court as well as the High
Court have mechanically read the evidence of eye witnesses and totally ignored
the well known principle of appreciation of evidence. We have very carefully
gone through the evidence of P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.5 and P.W.6 who claimed to be
the eye witnesses. If we compare the evidence of these eye witnesses it is
immediately noticed that their evidence is just like a parrot, telling about
what is taught. Even the omissions, contradictions and improvements are
identical. The claim of these eye witnesses is totally unbelievable when they
testified that they had gone to the place of occurrence. The distance between
their houses and the place or occurrence is said to be one furlong. It was
night time and the only light to be one furlong. It was night time and the only
light available was that of the Moon. A festival "Ganga
Dashara" was being celebrated in the village and
these witnesses claimed that they heard the noise of marpeet
by sticks and, therefore, they woke up.
During
the cross-examination they tried to explain by saying that they were not fully
asleep and, therefore, could hear the noise of marpeet.
They claimed that they had not consumed by liquor. Their further claim was that
when they went to the place of occurrence they all had earlier met at a place
which was in front of the house of Sukhnath (P.W.5).
The
claim of Sukhnath was that he overheard the talk
between other eye-witnesses and, therefore, he came out and went along with
them to the place of occurrence. The claim made by these eye witnesses in their
examination-in-chief was that they had actually seen the assault on Deosharan by the appellants but during cross-examination
they admitted that they did not see the actual assault as they were prevented
from going to the place of occurrence by the appellants.
The
talk between the appellants and these four eye witnesses was again absolutely
identical without adding a word 'less' or 'more'. In addition to the above, the
salient feature of their evidence is that after some time they again went to
the place of occurrence but they could not see the appellants as well as the
dead body. They searched for the appellants during the whole night. This claim of
these eye witnesses is difficult to be accepted because according to them, they
had already been threatened by saying that if they make any noise they would
meet the same fate like Deosharan. The assertion of
these witnesses that they had gone to the place of occurrence during that night
appeared to us a cock and bull story. Another circumstance weighed with us is
that despite such a ghastly attack on Deosharan, none
of them ever thought of going to the father of Deosharan
to inform him about the incident. They also did not go to the police station
during the same night to lodge the First Information Report. Further more the
story of these eye witnesses as regards the assault o Deosharan
is also not corroborate from the medical evidence. Dr. S.S.
Pankera (P.W.4) and noticed three external injuries on the head and
may small injuries on the whole chest, backside and
both feet, knees and below knees. Dr. S.S. Pankare
further opined that the dead body was mutilated and there was a fracture on
occipital portion and blood clot was present inside the skull. One has to only
test this evidence on the touchstone of probability that when five appellants
were simultaneously attacking Deosharan with the
sticks in their hands, of which the noise was heard from the distance of one
furlong, there ought to have been many more injuries on the dead body of Deosharan. After going through the evidence of these four
star witnesses who constituted a backbone of the prosecution story, we are of
the considered view that in all probabilities it was a blind murder.
(6) It
is no doubt true that there was no motive for these eye witnesses to implicate
the appellants in the present crime. That by itself would not lend any full
proof assurance that their evidence is credible and trustworthy.
It has
also come on the record that because of notorious character of Deosharan he had many enemies in and around the village and
if that be so the probability of somebody else other than the appellants being
the assailant cannot be ruled out, the courts below, in our opinion, had failed
to read the evidence of these eye witnesses in a proper perspective and had
fallen into error in accepting their evidence as credible and truthful.
(7)
Coming to the other corroborative evidence, viz., recovery of certain incriminating
articles at the instance of the appellants under section 27 of the Evidence
Act, assuming it to be true, the same cannot form the basis of conviction in
the present case. In our considered view the Sessions Court as well as the High
court had committed an error while convicting the appellants under Sections 302
and 201 IPC and consequently both the judgements are
required to be upset.
(8)
For the reasons recorded here in above we allow Criminal Appeal Nos. 325-29/96
filed by the appellants. The judgments and orders of conviction passed against
the appellants by the courts below are quashed and set aside and the appellants
are acquitted of all the charges. The appellants who are in jail be released
forthwith if not required in any other case.
Back