2009 (11) TMI 896 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether the nature of the investigation amounts to a further or a re- investigation? Whether the eye witnesses account stands substantiated by the medical evidence?

Summary

Issues:
1. Further investigation vs. re-investigation under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C.
2. Credibility of evidence collected by investigating officers.
3. Identification and culpability of multiple accused.
4. Presence of independent witnesses.
5. Application of Section 149 of the IPC.
6. Justification of High Court's acquittal of certain accused.

Further Investigation vs. Re-investigation under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C.: The case involved a debate on whether the investigation conducted by PW.27 amounted to further investigation or re-investigation. The Supreme Court analyzed the nature of the investigation carried out by PW.27, concluding that it was indeed a further investigation. The Court referred to various judgments to support this distinction, emphasizing that the determination should be based on the specifics of each case.

Credibility of Evidence Collected by Investigating Officers: The defense contended that due to discrepancies between investigations by PW.25 and PW.27, the evidence collected could not be relied upon for convictions. However, the State argued that the further investigation by PW.27 was comprehensive, involving reexamination of witnesses and additional statements under Sec. 164 of the Cr.P.C. The Court upheld the credibility of the evidence collected during the further investigation, dismissing the defense's argument.

Identification and Culpability of Multiple Accused: With a large number of accused individuals, the defense argued that it was challenging to identify and determine the culpability of each accused. The Court, after thorough consideration, rejected this argument and upheld the convictions based on the evidence presented during the trial.

Presence of Independent Witnesses: The defense raised concerns about the lack of independent witnesses in the case. However, the Court found that the presence of primary witnesses, including the daughter and grandson of the deceased, was natural and their testimony was credible, especially given the medical evidence supporting their accounts.

Application of Section 149 of the IPC: The complainant-appellant highlighted the application of Section 149 of the IPC, arguing that the mere presence of the acquitted accused during the incident should implicate them. The Court examined this argument but ultimately found no merit in the appeal, upholding the High Court's decision regarding the acquitted accused.

Justification of High Court's Acquittal of Certain Accused: The High Court had acquitted some of the accused individuals, leading to appeals challenging these acquittals. The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence, including witness statements and medical reports, and concurred with the High Court's decision. The Court emphasized that unless circumstances warranted, findings of acquittal should not be reversed, especially when based on credible evidence.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed all appeals, affirming the convictions of certain accused individuals while upholding the acquittals made by the High Court. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of each issue raised during the proceedings, ensuring a thorough examination of the legal complexities involved in the case.