JAWAHAR LAL SINGH versus NARESH SINGH & ORS.

Citation: [1987] 2 S.C.R. 220 · Decided: 10-02-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.L. OZA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
JAWAHAR LAL SINGH 
v. 
NARESH SINGI:I & ORS. 
FEBRUARY 10, 1987 
[G.L. OZA AND M.M. DUTI, JJ.] 
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: s.378(1) & (3),--Petition by State 
for leave to appeal against acquittal of accused charged under s.396 IPC 
dismissed in limine by High Court without a reasoned order-Case 
remitted to High Court for disposal in accordance with law. 
A nnmber of persons were tried on the allegation of committing a 
decoity with murder and charged for offence under s.396 of the Indian 
Penal Code. Eye witnesses claimed to have identified the accnsed 
persons in the light of a lantern. The evidence also attributed different 
parts to different accn~ed persons. The trial court after con•idering the 
D evidence discarded it and acqnitted all the accused persons of the 
charge. 
The High Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal against 
acquittal filed by the State Government under s.378( I) and (3) of the 
Code of Criminal Proce1lure in limine with the words "Prayer for leave 
E to appeal is refused. Appeal is dismissed." Without examining the 
reasons on the basis of which the trial court had discarded the evidence. 
The appellant appealed to this Conrt. 
Allowing the appeal, 
F 
HELD: The High Court should have considered titc matter and 
-~ -
passed a reasoned order. The incident was such wher•:n a number of 
persons were involved. There were a number of witnesses examined in 
the case. A perusal of the record shows that all the reasons on the basis 
of which the whole of the prosecution evidence had been discarded by 
the trial 1'0urt were not so simple or so good that they did not require 
G examination. l222B-C] 
The appeal alongwith the petition file<.! by the State for leave to 
appeal is restored to the file of the High Court, and directed to be disposed 
\.. 
of after hearing the partie:1, giving reasons for conclusions. [222E-F] 
r·. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
H No. 150 of 1986. 
220 
-
JAWAHAR LAL SINGH v. NARESH SINGH [OZA, J.] 
221 
1 
From the Judgment and Order dated 14.7.83 of the Patna High A 
Court in Govt. Appeal No. 29/83. 
S.N. Misra, M.M.P. Sinha and P.C. Kapur for the Petitioner. 
S.C. Misra and, Mrs. Gian Sudha Misra for the Respondents. 
B 
'f 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
'( 
OZA, J. This appeal has been filed in this Court against the 
-= 
dismissal in Iimine of a petition filed by the State of Bihar in the High 
Court of Judicature at Patna wherein learned Judges of the High Court 
rejected a petition for leave to appeal against acquittal filed by the c 
State Government under Sec.378( 1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal 
·r 
Procedure in limine by ony saying "Prayer for leave to appeal is 
refused. Appeal is dismissed." 
Before the trial Court 25 accused persons were tried on the alle-
gation that they committed dacoity and in the commission of the said 
D 
dacoity murder of one A jab Lal Singh was committed. Consquently all 
of them were charged for offence under Section 396 of the Indian 
I 
Penal Code. It is alleged that in the night intervening between 5th and 
..;,, 
6th day of June, 1980 at Village Nandlal Patti situated within P.S. 
Amarpur in the District of Bhagalpur, occurrence took place in the 
house of one Jawahar Lal Singh P.W. 21 who lodged the First Inforrna-
E 
tion Report, his house is situated in Nandlal Patti and in the course of 
dacoity his brother Ajab Lal Singh was killed. The incident is said to 
have taken place at 12 O'clock at midnight, and the information was 
_....,_. 
lodged on 6th of June 1980 at 8.45 A.M., at Bhagalpur Medical 
' 
College Hospital as the informant was lying injured in the surgical 
ward of the Hospital. At the trial there were number of eye witnesses 
F 
examined who claimed to have identified the accused persons in the 
light of a lentern burning at that time. The evidence also attributed 
different parts to different accused persons. The learned Sessions 
Judge after considering the evidence discarded the evidence and 
acquitted all the accused persons from the charge levelled against them 
__,J 
and unfortunately Hon'ble the High Court without examining the G 
reasons on the basis on which the learned Sessions Judge discarded 
~ 
evidence dismissed the leave petition and appeal as mentioned above 
-
and therefore we are at a disadvantage as we have not before us the 
examinaton of the reasons by the High Court on the basis of which the 
learned trial Court discarded the testi

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