LexKARAN SINGH versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
.. ' ) f A B c D E F G KARAN SINGH 11, STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH November 4, 1964 [A. K. SARKAR, N. R.AJAGOPALA AYYANGAR AND R. S. BACHAWAT, JJ.] Murder-<:ommon intention-Separate trial• of actual murderer a11d accompllce-Foriner acquitted while latter convicted on the basis of having common intention with former-Con11ic1ion whether justified-Indian. Panel Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860), s. 34. R shot at two persons and in consequence one died while the other did not. The appellant who himself carried a gun was present at the spot along with six others variously armed. R absconded, and the appellant along with the six other persons mentioned above was tried for offences under so. 302 and 307 read with ss. 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge convicted only the appellant giving benefit of doubt to others. The appellant filed an appeal before the High Court. After his comiction but before his appeal was heard, R was arrested, put up for trial on the same charges. and acquitted. The appellant's appeal before the High Court was dismissed but his con,iction was altered and instead of ss. 302 and 307 Indian Penal Code read with ss. 148 and 149 be was convicted for offences under ss. 302 and 307 of the Code read with s. 34. The appellant came to this C.ourt in further appeal. It was contended that in view of the acquittal of R by the Sessions Judge, from which there had been no appeal, it was not open to the High Court to hold that the appellant was guilty of murder and attempt to murder under ss. 302 and 307 read with s. 34, by finding that R who shared a common intention with him shot the deceased dead and attempted to murder another. HELD : In spite of the acquittal of a person in one case, it is open to the court in another case, to proceed on the basis-if the evidence warrants it-that the acquitted person was guilty of the offence of which he bad been tried in the other case, and to find in the later case that the persvn tried in it was guilty of an offence under s. 34 by virtue of having committed the offence along with the acquitted person. Each case has to be decided on the evidence led in it and this irrespective of any view of the same act that might have been taken on different evidence led in another case. [4E--OJ Marachalil Pakku v. State of Madras, A.l.R. 1954 S.C. 648, Bom- bodhar Pradhan v. State of Orlssa and Sunder Singh v. State of Punjab, A.l.R. 1962 S.C. 1211, relied upon. Prltam Singh v. State of Punjab A.I.R. 1956 S.C. 415, Sambasivam v. Pub/le Prosecutor, Federation of Malaya L.R. (19501 A.C. 458 and Krishna ff Govind Patil v. State of Mahara3htra, distinguished. - CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1963. 2 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1965] 2 s.c. Appeal . by special leave from the judgment and order, dated A August 27, 1962, of the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Gwalior Bench) at Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 1961. B. C. Misra, for the appellant. M. S. K. Sastri and /. N. Shroff, for the respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sarkar J. The appellant, Ramhans, and six other persons were alleged to have committed the murder of Gabde and to have attempted to murder Ramchandra. The deceased and Ramchandra are said to have belonged to one party while the alleged assailants c belonged to another, and between these two parties there had been great enmity for some time past. It was said that about midnight of November 18,' 1959, while the deceased and Ramchandra and certain other persons were sleeping on a Tiwaria (terrace), the assailants entered the place and Ramhans shot Gabde dead with a gun and fired two shots at Ramchandra with intent to kill him D but only succeeded in injuring him and that all this time the appellant was standing there armed with a gun and the other persons were also there armed variously and that all had entered the place with the common intention of committing the offences. Ramhans had absconded and so the appellant and the other E six alleged assailants were put up for trial for offences under ss. 302 and 307 read with ss. 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code for the inurder of Gabde and the attempt to murder Ramchandra. The learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant of these offences but acquitted the other six persons tried along with him, giving them the benefit of doubt. The appellant preferred an appeal to F the High Court of Madh
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.