LexJIVAN LAL AND ORS. versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
- JIVAN LAL AND ORS. A v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH DECEMBER 4, 1996 (DR. AS. ANAND AND KT. THOMAS, JJ.] B Evidence Act, 1872 : Section 13.f-Sole eye witlless-Evidentiary value of-Conviction can be based on the sole testimony of eye witness provided the same is found to C be wholly reliable-Where the testimony of such a wimess is partly reliable, prudence requires that corroboration of the testimony of that witness should be sought for from independent sources to base the conviction-Trial under sections 148 and 302/ 149 Indian Penal Code-13 accused-Acquittal of two accused by Trial Court-Acquittal of other eight accused by High Court-Con- viction of three appellants-Appeal preferred before Supreme Court-Mother D of deceased solitary eye wimcss-Her evidence in so far as the part attributed to the appellants was concerned found to be cogent and consistent-fl er testimony also corroborated by other evidence on record-Held, Trial Court and High Court committed no error in relying upon her testimony-Apprecia- tion evidence by both the courts below was proper-Merely because, JO other E persons named by her as accused were acquitted, would not render her testimony as wholly suspect because falsus in uno falsus in omnibus is not rule of law accepted by the courts in this country. Indian Penal Code, 1860 : F Sections 34, 148, 302/ 149-Vnlawful assembly-Common intention- Murde,-!3 accused-Acquittal of two accused by Trial Court-Further ac- quittal of eight accused by High Court-Conviction of three under sections . ' 148 and 302/149-Pennissibility of-1he manner in which the incident took place clearly indicated that the appellants had shared the common intention G of committing the murde,-They would therefore be liable for the said murder with the aid of section 34 I.P.C.-No prejudice was shown to have been caused to the appellants for not framing a distinct charge with the aid of section 34 J.P. C.~ntention which is a question of fact, has to be gathered from the evidence and the evidence on the record clearly established that the appellants did share the common intention of committing the murder-The H 537 538 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R. A convictioo of the appellants altered from under section 302/ 149 J.P. C. to the one under section 302/34 l.P.C. Dhanna etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, JT (1996) 6 SC 652, referred to. B Nanak Chand v. 171e State of Punjab, [1955] SCR 1201; Willie Slaney v. State of MP., AIR (1956) SC 116; Amar Singh v. State of Ha1yanq, AIR (1973) SC 222 and Bhoor Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab, AIR (1974) SC 1256, cited. C CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 366 of 1990 D E From the Judgment and Order dated 9.12.89 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Cr!. A. No. 659 of.1985. N.N. Keshwani and R.N. Keshwani for the Appellants. U.N. Bachawat, (Prashant Kumar) for Uma Nath Singh for the Respondent. The following Order of the Court was delivered : The appellants alongwith 10 others were tried for various offences including offences under section 148 and 302/149 l.P.C. in respect of an occurrence dated 11th June, 1984 in which deceased Mohan Lal received fatal injuries. The Trial Court vide judgment of 1st June 1985, acquitted two co-accused but convicted 11 for various offences including offences F under sections 148 and 302/149 I.P.C. They were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. All the 11 convicts filed appeal in the High Court against their conviction and sentence. On 9th December 1989, a Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal of 8 convicts and acquitted them by giving them the benefit of doubt. So far as the three appellants herein are G concerned, their conviction was maintained for the offences under section 302/149 I.P.C. The High Court opined that these three appellants had formed an unlawful assembly with "other unknown persons" with the com- mon object of committing murder of Mohan Lal as alleged by the prosecu- tion. By special leave, the appellants have filed this appeal. H We have heard Mr. Keshwani, learned counsel appearing for the - - ' JIVANLALv. STATE 539 appellants and Mr. U.N. Bachawat, learned senior counsel appearing for A the respondent and examined the record. The Trial Court as well as the High Court relied upon the testimony of Swami P.W. 8, brother of Mohan Lal and Saraswati, P.W. 9, the mother of deceased. It was found by the courts below that on the fa
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.