BALO YADAV AND OTHERS versus STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1071 · Decided: 29-04-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.N. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

BALO YADAV AND OTHERS 
v. 
STATE OF BIHAR 
APRIL 29, 1997 
[G.N. RAY AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.) 
Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Section 302 read with Sections 148 & 149: 
Rioting and murder-Conviction by t1ial cowt-{}nco"oborated evidence of 
eye-witness not acted upon by High Cowt-Acquittal of some of the accused 
A 
B 
by High Cowt-Appea/ by convicts pleading that evidence not relied upon as 
C 
regards acquitted accused should not be relied upon against them also-Held: 
Co"oborated evidence not stigmatised and liable to be rejected-Torchlight 
used by eye witnesses to identify assailants not a material object of evidence 
and failure to seize the torchlight could not be ground for impainnent of 
testimony-Incised wounds 011 dead body of victim and pe1f orated vital organs D 
not incompatible with sharp edged pointed weapons identified with assailants. 
The victim was assaulted with sharp-edged weapons, while asleep in 
a field in the mid of night, by appellants and few others. His son, PW 8, 
who was sleeping in the adjacent field and was woken up by commotion, 
rushed to the site with his torchlight and saw the assailants attack his E 
father. By then a few of the neighbouring cultivators had also rushed to 
the scene. The assailants fled the place. The victim died of extensive 
wounds on the spot itself. 
The Sessions Court found the evidence of eye-witnesses PW 5, PW 6 
and PW 8 reliable and indicted all the 14 accused for rioting and murder. F 
The High Court did not act on the evidence of PW 6. It chose to confirm 
the conviction only as against the appellants sine the version of PW 8 was 
corroborated by PW 5 only in respect of them. 
In appeal to this Court, it was contended for the appellants that as G 
the High Court did not rely on the evidence of PW 8 in respect of the 
acquitted accused, it should have spurned his evidence in regard to the 
appellants as well; that the failure of the police to seize the torchlight, which 
the eye witnesses claimed to have flashed for witnessing the occurrence had 
impaired the testimony of eye witnesses; and that weapons which the eye 
witnesses identified in the hands of the appellants were totally incompatible H 
1071 
1072 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1997} 3 S.C.R. 
A with the injuries found on the deceased. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1. The evidence or PW 8, (son of the victim) in regard to the 
appellants could not be stigmatised. Though the High Court was not in-
B clined to base a conviction on his evidence without corroboration from 
other materials, it has observed in clear terms that there was no reason to 
reject his evidence. The Court only wanted reassurance from other sour-
ces. The corroboration is what the Court required as a matter of prudence 
and as a step of caution. [1074-D-E] 
c 
2. Non-seizure of the torchlight cannot be considered a lapse on the 
part of the investigating oflicer, much less a ground for impairment of the 
testimony of eyewitness concerned. If the accused had used a torchlight or 
if the victim had a torchlight with him during the occurence, it could be 
insisted that the investigating ollicer should have seized it as the same could 
D be used as a material object during trial. But a torchlight used by the witness 
to see the occurence cannot be equated with the torchlight used by the victim 
or the assailants in the encounter for evidentary purpose. [1074-F-G] 
3. The weapons identified in the hands of the appellants could not be 
said to be incompatible with the injuries found on the dead body of the 
E deceased. All the injuries on the deceased were incised wounds and two of 
them had penetrated into the body and perforated some of the vital organs. 
The weapons used by the appellants were sharp cutting weapons. One or 
them could have been a sharp and pointed weapon. The doctor who con-
ducted the autopsy has said in evidence that the injuries which he noticed 
F could have been caused with those weapons. [1075-A-B] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 
324of1987. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.11.87 of the Patna High 
G Court in Crl.A. No. 189 of 1983. 
S.B. Sanyal and Rajesh Prasad Singh for the Appellants. 
Anil Kumar Jha for the Respondent. 
H 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
-
B. YADAVv. STATE [THOMAS,J.] 
1073 
THOMAS, J. The six appellants before us were among the 14 ac-
cused arrayed in the Sessions Court indicted for the murder of one 
Ramdeo Yadav during the wee hours on 30th O

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