1962 (4) TMI 140 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Conviction under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Identification of the accused at the test identification parade.
3. Admissibility of evidence under section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: The judgment dealt with the conviction of the appellants under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case revolved around the murder of a chowkidar, allegedly orchestrated due to the deceased's involvement in reporting the appellants' movements to the police. The court found that the evidence provided by witnesses, including the main witness P.W. 2, was credible and accepted by both the trial court and the High Court. The court concluded that the common intention to commit murder was established based on the appellants' actions and statements made during the incident, leading to the conviction under the relevant sections of the IPC.

Issue 2: The identification of one of the appellants, Nepali Master, at the test identification parade was challenged. The defense argued that the identification was based on the testimony of only one witness, which they deemed insufficient. However, the court noted that Nepali Master was identified by two witnesses, including an elderly witness with weak eyesight. The court upheld the identification, emphasizing that the credibility of a witness is crucial in determining the validity of identification evidence.

Issue 3: The admissibility of a document, Exhibit 6, was questioned under section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The defense contended that the document was hit by the provision as it was received during the investigation. The court clarified that section 162 pertains to statements made to a police officer during the course of investigation and does not encompass all statements made during that period. The court held that Exhibit 6, which contained crucial information regarding the motive behind the crime, was admissible under section 21 of the Evidence Act, as it provided corroboration to the testimonies of key witnesses. The court ruled that the document was not barred by section 162 and upheld its admissibility in evidence.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the convictions of the appellants under the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment highlighted the importance of credible witness testimonies, valid identification procedures, and the admissibility of crucial evidence in ensuring a fair trial and upholding justice.