LexARUN KUMAR versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2017] 3 S.C.R. 808 ARUN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 825 of 2017) MAY0!,2017 [R. K. AGRAWAL AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.378 - Appeal by son of deceased against acquittal of respondent nos.2-5 of charges C u/ss.302134, 201 and 307 /PC - Prosecution case was that accused persons equipped with guns and lathis attacked the complainant party resulting in death of one and gun shot and lathi injuries to two including the informant - Villagers witnessed the incident - Trial court acquitted the accused persons - Son of deceased filed appeal before High Court which was dismissed - On appeal, held: D In Lalit Kumar case, it was held that appellate court should be slow in interfering with the orders of acquittal unless there are compelling reasons to do so - High Court decided the appeal without keeping in view the law laid down in Lalit Kumar case - Further, High Court ought to have called for the record of the case from the trial court E as provided uls.385(2) of the Code which it seemed to have not done - Matter remai1ded to High Court to decide appeal afresh - Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302134, 201 and 307. Allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to High Court, the Court F HELD: 1.1 The High Court though in the impugned order G H referred to the evidence of some witnesses but neither referred and nor appreciated much less discussed the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution of as many as 13 witnesses in proper perspective. In other words, the High Court did not exercise its appellate powers while hearing the appeal in the manner it ought to have and dismissed the appeal finding no fault by observing in its conclusion that since the view taken by the Sessions Court is a plausible view, the same does not call for any interference by .. the High Court. [Para 19][812-C-D] 1.2 It is true that the appeal before the High Court was 808 ARUN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF BIHAR 809 against the acquittal order of the Sessions Judge whereby all the A accused charged for the offences punishable under Sections 302/ 34, 201 and 307 of IPC stood acquitted yet, the law laid down by this Court on the question of the powers of the Appellate Court while hearing the appeal arising out of acquittal order of the Sessions Judge in *La/it Kumar Sharma case should have been B kept in consideration by the High Court while hearing the appeal and further the High Court should have called for the record of the case from the Trial Court as provided under Section 385 (2) · of the Code which it seems was not called for. The cursory manner in which the High Court disposed of the appeal does not command to uphold the impugned order. In any event, the C respondents (accused) would have full opportunity to place their case before the High Court on remand and urge all their submissions in support of the order of the Sessions Judge on the merits. [Paras 20, 24, 25][812-E-F; 813-H; 814-A-B] *Lalit Kumar Sharma & Ors. v. Superintendent & D Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, Govt. of West Bengal 1989 Supp (2) SCC 140 - relied on. Case Law Reference 1989 Supp (2) sec 140 relied on Para 20 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 825 of2017. From the Judgment and Order dated 21.04.2014 of the High Court . of Judicature at Patna, in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1030 of2013. E Rohit Sharma, Rounak Nayak, Arvind Kumar, Tiwary Sandeep F Puggal, (for Harish Pandey), Advs. for the Appellant. E. C. Vidya Sagar, Shantanu Sagar, Gopal Sirigh, Manish Kumar, Shivam Singh, Ad vs. for the Respondents. I.he Judgment of the Court was delivered by ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is filed by the son of the deceased-Sheo Kumar Pa ti Tiwari against the final Order dated 21. 04.2014 passed by the High Court ofJudicature at Patna in Criminal Appeal(D.B.) No. I 030 of2013 G H 810 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017) 3 S.C.R. A - whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") against the acquittal ofrespondent Nos.2-5 of the charges under Sections 302/34, 201 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as B "IPC") vi de judgment dated 17.09.2013 passed by the Ad-hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge-III, Siwan in Sessions Trial No.32of1993. 3.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.