DHARAM PAL & ORS. versus THE STATE OF U.P.

Citation: [1976] 1 S.C.R. 587 · Decided: 01-09-1975 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HAMEEDULLAH BEG · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
' 
B 
c 
y 
I 
D 
E 
F 
-
G 
H 
587 
DHARAM PAL & ORS. 
v. 
THE STATE OF U.P. 
September 1, 1975 
[M. H. BEG, P. N. BHAGWATI AND R. S. S.~11.ICARIA, JJ.] 
/, P. C. Sl'c. ,J02 rec.d with sec. 149'_ and 34--Conviction of four accused and 
acquittal of 
re.~t-Whe1her unlawful assentbly-W/lether 
conviction 
under 
co1nn1on i111e11tion-Vica1ious lki.bility-U.P. CJdldren Act, 1951-Sec. 29- ' 
Young accused-Recdn11nendntion of re111issio11, 
The 4 appellants were trled along with 14 others for the offence of rioting 
in the course of which 2 n1urders were conunitted at 6-30 a.m. on 7~6--1967. 
The prosecution revealed a Jong standing. enmity between the tyo grOups; one' to 
which the appellants belonged and the. other to which the deceased belonged. 
Thei defence -case was that people belonging to the group of the deceased! kille.d 
the deceased and that thereafter they attacked the 3 injured appellants. At 
the trial, however, the defence witnesess stated that the 3 witnesses who were 
injured attempted to save, the deceased and were, therefore, injured. 
The prosecution evidence suffered from-some quite obvious infirmities. Each 
of the 4 injured eye witnesses while naming each of the 18 accused person~ 
as participants in the occurrence an~_~ecifying_ their weapons _without arty 
contradiction had failed to assign any partkular part of any of them. 
Each 
injured eye-witness said that all 18 accused nersons \Vere assaulting the injurtd. 
This was hardly consistent with the medicaf evidence. 
The 1'ria1 Court acquitted 11 accused giving them the benefit of doubt 
<n1d convicted 7 including the 4 appellants under section 302 read with section 
149. 
The High Court gave the benefit of doubt to a11 the accused except the 
4 appellants. The High Court came to the conclusion that the 4 appellants 
had. taken part in the attack in viCw of the· adn1ission of the 4 accused about 
their participation in the occurrence corroborated by the injuries on the bodies 
of 3 of then1; 
On appeal by Special· Leave, it was contended by the appellants that sini:e 
14 out of 18 accused persons were actually ac·quitted the Court n1ust presume 
that total number or assailants was less than 5 and that they, therefore, cannot 
he convicted under section 149. 
HELD : 1. It is true that the acquittal of an accused person does raise, 
in the eye of law, a presumption that he is innocent even if be \Vas actua1ly 
guilty, but it is only the acquitted accused person and not the convicted accused 
person who can, as a rule. get the· benefit of such a presun1ption. 
The effect 
of findings on qu~stions of f~ct depends upon the nature of those findings. If 
only five known persons are a11eged to have participated in an attack and the 
courts find that 2 of them were falsely implicated it would be quite natural 
and logical to infer or presume that the participants were less th.an 5 
in 
number. On the other hand, if the court holds that the assailants were· actually 
5 in number but there could be a doubt as to the identity of 2 of the aJlcged 
assailants, and. therefOre, acquits 2 Of them., the others will not get thei benefit 
of doubt, so long as there is a firn1 finding based on good evidence and sound 
reasoning that the participants we·re 5 or more in nuni.ber. 
Such a ca .. -.e i-.; 
one of doubt only as to ideritity or some participants and not as to total number 
of participants. 
[594A-C] 
· 
2. It is true that there are some infirmities in the -prosecution evidence. 
Ho~ver, the impression of rustic witnesses sou&}lt to be .conveyed tbrou~h 
their statements cannot be interprc.ted as though they were made in Carefully 
-drawn up docun1ents calling for a literal ·interpretation. 
[592 F, HJ 
588 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1976] [ S.C.R. 
3. The number and location of injuries on both sides also indicate an attack 
by a group of persons which must have surrounded the party of the deceased 
persons travelling ill the Buggi. 
Even if 2 persons are engaged in stopping th..: 
Bugg_i and there are 2 on each side of the Buggi then the number would be 6. 
Again, even if one person is assumed to be the assailant of each oi' the victims 
in a. simultaneous attack upon them the number of such assailants alone would 
conie to at least 6. 'The dece~sed had injuries with 9harp edged weapons and 
lat/tis. 
It is·, therefore, clear that each one was attacked by more than one 
person. 
These facts were enough to come to the conclusion that the total 
number of 

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