KHAIRUDDIN & ORS. versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Citation: [2013] 3 S.C.R. 478 · Decided: 07-05-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2013] 3 S.C.R. 478 
KHAIRUDDIN & ORS. 
v 
STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
(Criminal Appeal No. 2036 of 2009) 
MAY 7, 2013 
[T.S. THAKUR AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] 
PENAL CODE, 1860 
c 
ss. 3021149, 148 and 3231149- Death of two persons and 
injuries to others as a result of attack by accused persons -
Held: Conviction of four of the appellants who have been 
named in FIR and attributed specific role and the fifth 
appellant who though not named in FIR but attributed specific 
0 role and also stated in his statement u!s.313 about his 
presence at the place of occurrence and participation, upheld 
- Remaining appellants acquitted giving them benefit of 
doubt - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -s.313. 
E 
CONSTITUTION OF IND/A, 1950: 
Art. 136 - Scope of - Held: The width and plenitude of 
powers available under Art. 136 would permit a reappraisal at 
the apex stage in cases of manifest injuries. 
F 
Twenty six persons including 16 appellants were 
prosecuted for murder of two persons and causing injuries to 
others. The prosecution case was that there was dispute 
between the complanant's side and the accused-appellants 
over the land which was in cultivatory possession of the 
complainant party. On the day of the incident at about 10.00 
G a.m, when PW1 and others were working in the land in 
dispute, twenty four named accused and some others came 
there armed with bows and arrows, knives, daggers, lathis etc. 
and attacked the complainant party causing death of two 
H 
478 
KHAIRUDDIN & ORS. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL 479 
persons and injuries to others. The trial court convicted 21 
A 
accused u/ss.3021149, 148 and 3231149 and sentenced each 
of them to imprisonment for life. The High Court affirmed the 
conviction and sentence. Appellant no. 11 died pending 
appeal. 
. 
It was contended for the appellants that out of 
sixteen appellants found guilty, only five were named in 
FIR and attributed specific roles and the remaining were 
B 
not named in the FIR or, if named, no specific role was 
attributed to them in the evidence adduced at the trial; 
C 
and that there were several contradictions in the 
deposition of prosecution witnesses as to the genesis of 
the incident and actual sequence of events which 
resulted in the death of two persons who participated in 
the incident. It was submitted that in the circumstances, 
the entire prosecution case was rendered suspect D 
entitling the appellants to an acquittal 
Allowing the appeal in part, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. It is trite that appreciation of evidence is 
E 
essentially the duty of the trial court, and the first appellate 
court. But in cases, where, the Courts below are shown 
to have faltered and ignored material aspects resulting in 
·miscarriage of justice, this Court can and has interfered 
to grant relief. That is because even when this Court may 
not be an ordinary court of appeal, the width and the 
plenitude of the powers available to it under Art.136 would 
permit a reappraisal even at the apex stage in cases of 
manifest injustice. [para 9) [487-A-C] 
F 
Radha Mohan Singh v. State of UP. 2006 (1) SCR 519 
G 
= (2006) 2 SCC 450, Bhagwan Singh v. State of Rajasthan 
(1976) 1 SCC 15, Kirpal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1964 
SCR 992 =AIR 1965 SC 712 - relied on. 
2.1. The evidence adduced at the trial comprising the 
H 
480 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2013] 3 S.C.R. 
A depositions of PW-1 PW-4 PW-5, PW-6 and PW-17, 
attributed overt acts of assault to only five of the 
appellants namely appellants nos. 1,3,4,9 and 11. 
Appellant No.11 expired during the pendency of the 
appeal. These appellants were not only named in the FIR 
B but were in specific terms named even at the trial by the 
witnesses examined by the prosecution, some of whom 
were themselves injured in the incident, thereby, proving 
their presence on the spot beyond any doubt. The courts 
below have also appreciated their depositions in the right 
c perspective and rightly held that the presence and 
participation of the five appellants in the incident was 
established by the prosecution beyond any reasonable 
doubt. To that extent, therefore, there is no reason to 
interfere with the findings recorded by the trial court and 
0 affirmed by the High Court except recording that appellant 
no. 11 has died pending appeal and his appeal stands 
abated. [para 10] [487-E-H; 488-A-B] 
2.2. None of the appellants nos. 8, 12 and 16, 
admittedly, was named in the FIR, which was lodged by 
E PW-1 who was pre

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