1999 (9) TMI 1007 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Conviction under Section 302/149 IPC
Applicability of Section 34 IPC for murder of Tapeshwar
Conviction under Section 324/34 IPC

Analysis:
The judgment involves the conviction of seven accused appellants under Section 302/149 IPC for causing the murder of two individuals. The prosecution's case was based on the unlawful assembly formed by the accused while ploughing disputed land, leading to a confrontation resulting in the deaths. The Sessions Judge convicted all accused under Section 302/149, with one accused directly responsible for the fatal gunshot. On appeal, the High Court upheld the convictions of seven appellants under Section 302/149 and two others under Section 302/34, while acquitting five accused due to lack of evidence attributing a shared common object to them.

The primary issue addressed by the Supreme Court was the legality of the convictions under Section 302/149 IPC. The Court analyzed the evidence of the eye witnesses and concluded that the accused did not form an unlawful assembly with a common object as required by Section 141 of the IPC. As such, the conviction under Section 149 IPC was deemed unsustainable, except for the accused directly responsible for the fatal gunshot, who was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Regarding the applicability of Section 34 IPC for the murder of Tapeshwar, the Court examined the principle of joint liability and common intention. It was established that the accused who directly inflicted fatal blows shared a common intention, while those who facilitated the act by holding the victim were acquitted of the charges. The Court emphasized the necessity of a prearranged plan or prior concert for the application of Section 34 IPC, leading to the differentiation in liability among the accused involved in the murder.

The judgment also addressed the conviction under Section 324/34 IPC for two appellants who caused injuries to the informant. Despite the convictions, considering the time spent in custody, the Court directed their immediate release. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellant directly responsible for the fatal gunshot under Section 302 IPC, dismissed the appeals of the other convicted appellants under Section 302/149 IPC, and affirmed the convictions under Section 302/34 IPC for the two accused directly involved in the murder of Tapeshwar. The acquitted accused were ordered to be released, and the convicted appellants causing injuries to the informant were directed to be set at liberty due to their prolonged custody.