2018 (6) TMI 1839 - SC - Indian Laws

Common intent of committing murder - sustaining grievous injury as a result of assault by the Appellant - acquittal of the accused - HELD THAT - It is by now well settled that the Appellate Court hearing the appeal filed against the judgment and order of acquittal will not overrule or otherwise disturb the Trial Court's acquittal if the Appellate Court does not find substantial and compelling reasons for doing so. If the Trial Court's conclusion with regard to the facts is palpably wrong; if the Trial Court's decision was based on erroneous view of law; if the Trial Court's judgment is likely to result in grave miscarriage of justice; if the entire approach of the Trial Court in dealing with the evidence was patently illegal; if the Trial Court judgment was manifestly unjust and unreasonable; and if the Trial Court has ignored the evidence or misread the material evidence or has ignored material documents like dying declaration/report of the ballistic expert etc. the same may be construed as substantial and compelling reasons and the first appellate court may interfere in the order of acquittal. The High Court, while convicting the Appellant has confirmed the judgment of acquittal passed in favour of the Accused Nos. 2 to 5. Their acquittal as confirmed by the High Court is not questioned by the State before this Court. Thus, the judgment of the High Court acquitting Accused Nos. 2 to 5 has attained finality. Therefore, it is clear that the Trial Court and the High Court have, on facts, not believed the case of the prosecution in respect of the assault by the Accused Nos. 2 and 3 - Absolutely no material is found against the Appellant herein to convict him for the offences Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code inasmuch as he had not played any role in the death of the two deceased. In addition to the same, both the Courts have, on facts concluded that there was no common intention on the part of the accused, in commission of crime. The Appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. Consequently, the judgment of the High Court convicting him for the said offence stands set aside - judgment passed by the High Court convicting the Appellant for the offence Under Section 326 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him for imprisonment of 7 years stands confirmed and is imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. In default of deposit/payment of fine (if not already deposited) within eight weeks from today, the Appellant shall undergo imprisonment for two years additionally. The fine, if recovered, shall be paid to PW. 23 (informant-Honnamma) as compensation - Appeal allowed in part.

Summary

Issues:
1. Reversal of acquittal and conviction of the Appellant under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Evaluation of evidence against the Appellant in a case involving multiple accused and assault leading to deaths.
3. Applicability of principles of law in overturning a judgment of acquittal.
4. Consideration of witness testimony, medical evidence, and common intention in determining guilt.
5. Justification of conviction for the offense under Section 326 while acquitting for the offense under Section 302.

Analysis:

1. The Supreme Court judgment pertains to the reversal of acquittal and conviction of the Appellant under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code by the High Court. The Trial Court acquitted all accused, but the High Court convicted the Appellant based on the prosecution's case involving assault leading to deaths and grievous injuries. The High Court acquitted Accused Nos. 2 to 5 but convicted the Appellant, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

2. The case involved a detailed evaluation of evidence, primarily focusing on the testimony of the injured eye-witness, Smt. Honnamma. The prosecution's case revolved around the assault by the accused, resulting in the deaths of two individuals. The Trial Court acquitted all accused, while the High Court convicted the Appellant based on specific allegations and witness testimony, leading to a detailed analysis of the events and the roles played by each accused.

3. The judgment also delves into the principles governing the overturning of a judgment of acquittal by an Appellate Court. It emphasized that interference with a Trial Court's acquittal should be based on substantial and compelling reasons, such as errors in fact-finding, legal misinterpretations, or miscarriage of justice. The Court cited precedents to highlight the importance of ensuring justice and preventing wrongful convictions.

4. The analysis considered the witness testimony, medical evidence, and the concept of common intention in determining the guilt of the accused. Specific overt acts were attributed to the Appellant by the eye-witness, Smt. Honnamma, regarding the assault on her, while no evidence pointed to his involvement in the deaths of the other victims. The Court emphasized the importance of clear evidence and the lack of common intention in convicting the accused for specific offenses.

5. Ultimately, the Court found the Appellant guilty of the offense under Section 326 but acquitted him of the offense under Section 302. The judgment highlighted the justification for the partial acquittal based on the evidence presented, the nature of injuries sustained, and the lack of conclusive proof of the Appellant's involvement in the deaths. The Appellant was sentenced accordingly, considering the period of imprisonment already served and the fine imposed as compensation to the informant.

This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the thorough consideration of evidence, legal principles, and the application of law in delivering justice in a complex criminal case.