LexCHAND KHAN & ANR. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
CHAND KHAN & ANR.
v.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
JULY 11, 1995
B
[DR. A.S. ANAND AND M.K. MUKHERJEE, JJ.J
!11dia11 Penal Code 1860--Ss. 452, 148, 302/ 149, 325/ 149, 324/ 149,
323/149-IPC-M!lrdcr-{}nlawflll assembly-Grievolls hwts--Trial of 9 ac-
Cllsed-f'our eye witnesses disbelieved-Acquittal of all-Appeal to High
C
Coltlt-Four eye witn.esses-One of them causing lutn and injwy to one of
the accused-Hence High Cowt believed evidence of eye witnesses--Omvict-
ing 5 accused-Validity of
Evidence Act 1872.
D
S.114 (g) Failure to collect evidence-Failure to prod!lce eyidence--
E
F
G
Presumption by Collrt.
Legal Maxims.
Fals11S in ltlW, falsus in om11iblls-Applicability of
According to the prosecution P.W. 6 and the deceased were business
partners and P.W. 7 joined them as a worker. Appellants along with
another accused came to P.W. 6 on 26.5.1977 at about' 1 p.m. and assaulted
him when he rerused to release P.W. 7 who was earlier working with them.
P.W. 6 liled a complaint with the police. On the same night the appellants
with seven others came to the house ·or the deceased who was sitting with
his friends and P.W.2. The accused were armed with knives and gandasa
and at once assaulted the deceased and others. Hearing their cries P.W. 1
and P.W. 4 came to the site. Appellants entered the kitchen and assaulted
P.W. 5 and received blow or a knire when tried lo attack her mother. While
Reeing away one or the Appellants thrust the knife on the neck or the
deceased. Deceased was admitted to and died in hospital. FIR was lodged
immediately by P.W. 1 mentioning the injury received by one or the
Appellants besides members or the complainant's family viz. P.W. 1 and
P.W. 5, the neighbour P.W. 4 and P.W. 2, a friend of the deceased, ·
H witnessed the incident.
848
CHAND KHANv. STATEOFU.P .
849
. The police investigation culminated in the trial of all the 9 accused A
persons.
The Trial Court acquitted all the accused persons disbelieving the
four eye witnesses as unworthy of any credit.
The High Court in an appeal filed by the State found the appellants B
and three others guilty and convicted them for the offences under Ss.452,
-,
148, 325/149,324/149,323/149. The High Court also convicted the appellants
for the offence under section 302/149 and sentenced them to life imprison-
ment.
,...
.,
The Appellants filed the present appeal under Section 379 of Cr. P.C. C
invoking their statutory right.
It was contended on behalf of the appellants that :(1) the High Court
was not justified in interfering with the evidence even if another reasonably
possible view of the evidence in favour of the prosecntion might be taken.
The incident that took place in the afternoon in which p.w. 6 was assaulted D
by the Appellant might have been a motive for the former to assault the
latter and not vice-versa. And the assault on P.W.5 and appellant inside the
house was patently false because neither any blood was found nor any knife
was recovered by the Investigation Officer.
Dismissing the appeal, this Court
E
HELD : 1. The High Court found the evidence of the four eye witnesses
examined by the prosecution namely P.Ws. 1, 2,4, and 5 convincing and the
reasons given by the trial Court for disbelieving them and discarding the
case were perverse. The High Court co1nmitted no error or injustice in
p
interfering with the order of acquittal for it has noticed all the salient
features of the case in the judgment of the trial court, discussed them well
and disapproved them for cogent and justified reasons. (855-A, CJ
2. Proof of motive is not essential for success of a prosecution case
where the ocular testimony in support of it is convincing and reliable.
G
[856-A]
3. It was. imperative fur th~ trial court to consider the case of the
individua1 accused· on their respective merits in the light of other evidence
on record and not to outright reject the evidence of the witnesses in its
entirety for the reason that princ1j1le of Falsas in uno, falsus in oninibu; H
850
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 1 S.C.R.
A
does not apply to criminal trial and it is the duty of the court to disengage
the truth and falsehood. [858-F-G]
B
4. P.W. 2 and two more friends of the deceased were present at the
material time as testified by the four eye witnesses was admitted by the
defence. It was also admitted that besides the deceased the above three
persons as well as lady members ol the house sustaiExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.