AKHLAKALI HAYATALLI versus THE STATE OF BOMBAY.

Citation: [1954] 1 S.C.R. 435 · Decided: 09-12-1953 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BIJAN KUMAR MUKHERJEA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

) 
S.C.lt. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
435 
The court-fees ·payable to tile Government will come 
out of defendant No. 1 in this case. 
We certify for 
two counsel and an agent in this appeal. 
Appeal allowecl. 
Agent for the appellant: 
J.11.S.K. Sastri. 
Agent for the respondent : Nau nit Lal. 
AKHLAKALl HAYATALLI 
v. 
THE STATE O:F BOMBAY. 
[B. K. MuKHERJEA arid N. H. BHAGWA'rI JJ.] 
Criminal Proced·urc Code (V of 1898 as amended), -ll. 807-Re-
ference to High Oo1irt-Propcr approach-J,ury-Sole Judges of 
facts-Provided verdict co1dd be arrived cit by reasonable body of 
men. 
The proper method of approach in the matters of references 
under s. 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code as finally settled is 
that the High Court will only interfere with the verdict of the 
jury if it finds the verdict perverse in the sense of being unreason-
able, manifestly wrong or against the weight of evidence. 
If the facts and circumstances of the case are such that a 
reasonable body of men could arrive at one conclusion or the 
other, it is not competent to the Sessions Judge or the High Court 
to substitute their verdict in place of the verdict which has been 
given by the jury. The jury are the sole judges of the facts and it 
is the right of the accused to have the benefit of the verdict of the 
jury. Even if the Sessions Judge or the High Court would, if left 
to themselves, have anived at a different verdict, it is not com-
petent to the Sessions Judge to make a reference nor ta the F,[igh 
Comt to accept the same and substitute their own verdict for the 
verdict of the jury provided the verdict was such as could be arriv-
ed at by a reasonable body of men on the facts and circumstances 
of the case. 
· 
Ramamtgrah Singh v. Emperor (A. I. R. 1946 P. C.- 151) 
referred to. 
CRIMINAL APPELLA'l'E 
JURISDICTION. 
Criminal 
Appeal No. 76 of 1953. 
..., 
Appear by special leave against the Judgment and 
Order dated the 16th June, 1952, of the High Court of 
Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Jury Reference 
No. 58 of 1952. 
19/ii! 
Ohilukuri 
V enkateswarl u 
v. 
Ohilukuri 
Venkatanarayana 
191i3 
Dec. 9. 
' 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT .REPORTS 
437 
on the right arm pit, on the front sid~ of the shirt and 
on the right thigh. There were-_ also blood stains on 
the right side collar and on the back of the shirt. 
· 
The defence put up by the appellant was that he 
was a fruit broker and after collecting his dues from 
the Crawford market up to 11 p.m., he came to the 
corner of Dhobi 
Street, when 
he heard the · shouts, 
"chor, chor" and 
he also then shouted 
"chor, 
chor" 
and ran after the person who was running away. in order 
to catch him. When he reached the junction of Nagdevi 
Cross Street he fell down and the . person who. was 
rulJiling 
ahead of him rushed into a gutter. 
As he 
was ·ahead and members of the public were following 
him, three or four of them fell on his body after c he 
fell down and when he got up he was caught by two 
or three other persons who all said that . he was the 
man. Sub-Inspector Chawan was one · of these ·J?Crsons. 
Chawan was suspected to be his accomplice, 
but some-
one said that· he was a police officer and 
Chawan was 
then released. The appellant was put Into . the police 
·pilot car which • came along and taken to 
the police 
station. 
l{e was then taken to the scene of the offence 
and a panchnaina 
was drawn there. 
He was again 
brought to the police station thereafter and was_ made 
to sit in the charge room. 
As he was feeling very hot, 
he removed his shirt and kept it by his side. 
In the 
meanwhile, a 
police constable came there 
and gave 
him a blow on his nose saying, "Do you think this is 
. your father's residence 
that you removed your shirt?" 
He thereupon garted bleeding from his nose, and due 
to that bleeding his shirt and trousers 
were stained 
with blood. 
The same constable then asked him to 
put on the clothes and took him to his officer. 
He 
produced the 
appellant 
before. D. I. Kakatkar who 
there noticed 
his 
clothes. The panchas . were then 
called and a panchnama was drawn up in . which the 
blood stains on the shirt and trousers were noted. 
The appellant was tried by the Additional Sessions 
Judge and a 
common jury. The prosecution 
called 
the evidence of the 
complainant. Abdul Satar, 
Babu 
Adam and Sub-Inspector Chawan. 
Evidence 
was led 
of an identification parade which was held in the 
6-93 S.C.lndia/59 
· 1953 
Akhlakali 
Ha.Jatalli 
.v. 
. Th Stat• of

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.