CHAITU GOWALA AND ANOTHER versus THE STATE OF ASSAM

Citation: [2022] 7 S.C.R. 190 · Decided: 07-09-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
190
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
CHAITU GOWALA AND ANOTHER
v.
THE STATE OF ASSAM
(Criminal Appeal No. 325 of 2020)
SEPTEMBER 07, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 302 and 149 – Appellants alongwith
70 other accused persons were accused of murdering the Managing
Director of a company in which they were working – Prosecution
examined three eye witnesses who identified the appellants – Trial
Court convicted appellants and sentenced them to life imprisonment
– High Court confirmed the conviction – On appeal, held : On
considering the disposition of the eye witnesses nothing is
forthcoming that appellants caused any injury to the deceased and
participated in any manner in commission of the offence – There
were some disputes with respect to wages and appellants were present
at the incident site as office bearers of the labour union – It has
come on record that appellant-Chaitu Gowda told something to the
labourers in their own language following which the labourers
became very agitated – But nothing on record what was uttered by
the accused –  In absence of any concrete evidence, the appellants
cannot be convicted u/s.302 IPC with the aid of s.149 IPC –
Impugned judgment of High Court and trial court quashed and set
aside.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: On considering deposition of the eye witnesses,
PW3, PW4 and PW6, nothing is forthcoming that the appellants
caused any injury on the deceased and/or participated in any
manner in commission of the offences for which they are
convicted. If the entire evidence and the deposition of the eye
witnesses are scanned, it appears that in fact the appellants were
present there as office bearers of the Union. There were some
disputes with respect to wages. Even as per the deposition of
PW3, on being called, the appellants entered into the office room
but soon both of them came out and told the assembled labourers
[2022] 7 S.C.R. 190
190
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
191
that the Managing Director would distribute their dues and asked
them to go to the place where dues were to be distributed. Despite
the same, the labourers protested that they would not accept
anything other than the full dues and they started shouting. The
other labourers – co-accused snatched the carbine of the PSO
and to that the deceased – Managing Director asked the appellant
– Chaitu Gowala as to why the weapon of PW3 was snatched, he
being a public servant. It has come on record that on this, the
appellant – Chaitu Gowala told something to the labourers in their
own language following which the labourers became very agitated.
Nothing is on record what was uttered by the accused – Chaitu
Gowala. Therefore, in absence of any concrete evidence that the
appellants attacked and/or caused any injury to the deceased and/
or even the PSO and in absence of any evidence what was uttered
by the appellants – accused in their own language and in absence
of any evidence that the appellants instigated the labourers –
others co-accused, the appellants cannot be convicted for the
offence under Section 302 IPC with the aid of Section 149 IPC.
The conviction of the appellants, for the offences for which they
are convicted is unsustainable. [Para 5][193-B-H; 194-A]
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.
325 of 2020.
From the Judgment and Order dated 04.12.2018 of the High Court
of Gauhati at Gauhati in Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 2013.
Manish Goswami, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advs. for the
Appellants.
Ms. Diksha Rai, Ms. Ragini Pandey, Debojit Borkakati, Advs. for
the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order dated 04.12.2018 passed by the Division Bench of the Gauhati
High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 62/2013, by which the High Court
has dismissed the said appeal and has confirmed the conviction of the
appellants herein – Chaitu Gowala and Ajay Ahari - original accused
CHAITU GOWALA AND ANOTHER v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
192
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
Nos. 2 & 1 respectively, convicting them for the offences under Sections
302/392/148/323/149 IPC and sentencing them to undergo life
imprisonment, original accused Nos. 2 & 1– Chaitu Gowala and Ajay
Ahari respectively have preferred the present appeal.
2. The appellants herein along with other co-accused (70 in
numbers) were tried for the offences under Sections 302/392/148/323/
149 IPC for having comm

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