1981 (4) TMI 283 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Acquittal under Section 302/149 and Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Right of private defence.
3. Evaluation of evidence and witness credibility.
4. Sentencing.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Acquittal under Section 302/149 and Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code:
The appeal was directed against the acquittal of the respondents by the Allahabad High Court, which had overturned the trial court's conviction under Sections 302/149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial court had convicted the respondents for the murder of four individuals and causing serious injury to another, while the High Court acquitted them citing the right of private defence.

2. Right of Private Defence:
The High Court acquitted the respondents on the grounds that they acted in the exercise of the right of private defence. The High Court believed that the altercation occurred in the field of the accused and that the prosecution party attempted to remove paddy, leading to the respondents firing in self-defence. However, the Supreme Court found this reasoning flawed, noting that the High Court overlooked significant evidence indicating that the altercation took place in the field of the widows, as supported by the Investigating Officer's findings of bullets, pellets, empty cartridges, blood stains, and other articles at the scene.

3. Evaluation of Evidence and Witness Credibility:
The Supreme Court scrutinized the High Court's evaluation of the evidence and witness credibility. The High Court disbelieved key prosecution witnesses (P.W. 1 and P.W. 2) based on speculative reasoning and disjointed statements. The Supreme Court found that the High Court ignored crucial facts and failed to appreciate the consistent and corroborative testimonies of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2. The trial court had found these witnesses credible, and their evidence was supported by physical evidence at the scene.

The Supreme Court also addressed the injuries on the accused, which the High Court used to doubt the prosecution's case. The Supreme Court noted that the injuries were mostly superficial and were explained by the prosecution as resulting from the deceased defending themselves with lathis.

4. Sentencing:
The Supreme Court reinstated the convictions under Section 302/149 IPC, sentencing the respondents to life imprisonment. It also convicted Barrakkey alias Krishan Kumar under Section 148 IPC, sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for two years, and Parag and Ambika under Section 147 IPC, sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The court decided against imposing the death penalty on Sahai, despite the brutal nature of the murders, due to the prolonged litigation and the time elapsed since the occurrence.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's acquittal, and reinstated the trial court's convictions with modified sentences. The bail of the respondents was cancelled, and the Sessions Judge was directed to issue warrants for their custody to serve the sentences imposed.