PARSHURAM versus STATE OF M.P.

Citation: [2023] 14 S.C.R. 186 · Decided: 03-11-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI · Disposal: Disposed off
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2023] 14 S.C.R. 186 : 2023 INSC 973
186
CASE DETAILS
PARSHURAM
v. 
STATE OF M.P.
(Criminal Appeal No. 524 of 2021)
With
(Criminal Appeal No. 3416 of 2023)
NOVEMBER 03, 2023 
[B.R. GAVAI, B.V. NAGARATHNA AND 
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.]
HEADNOTES
Issue for consideration: Whether the courts below were justiﬁ ed in 
convicting and sentencing the appellants for the oﬀ ences punishable u/s. 
302/149, s.326/149, s.324/149, s.323/149, s.147 and s.148 IPC.
Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 304 Part II, 302/149, 326/149, 324/149, 
323/149, 147 and 148 – Murder – Unlawful assembly – Accused persons 
formed an unlawful assembly when the buﬀ alo of the complainant party 
spoiled the taparia built by the accused, and thereafter grieviously 
assaulted the complainant and his members with deadly weapons, killing 
one of them – Conviction and sentence of the appellants for the oﬀ ences 
punishable u/s. 302/149, 326/149, 324/149, 323/149, 147 and 148 by the 
courts below – Tenability of:
Held: Inconsistencies in the evidence of two prosecuting witness 
being rustic villagers not fatal – Their evidence that the appellants were 
members of the unlawful assembly, though no speciﬁ c role attributed to 
them of assaulting the deceased – It is not necessary that such a person, for 
being convicted, must have actually assaulted the deceased – Trial court’s 
observation that no fatal weapons were used by the complainant party in 
assaulting the accused persons, whereas accused used fatal weapons, not 
correct since injuries sustained by one of the accused was by a sharp weapon 
– Furthermore, witnesses are interested witnesses – Non-explanation of 
187
injuries on the persons of the accused creates a doubt, on the prosecution 
case – Moreso, cross case was registered against the complainant party 
– Defence by accused that the complainant party started assaulting them 
resulting into a free ﬁ ght in which the persons from both the sides received 
injuries and one person of complainant’s side died – Entire incident arose 
on account of the happening on the previous day-buﬀ alo spoiling the 
taparia built by accused – No clarity as to whether the common object of 
the unlawful assembly was to cause the death of the deceased – Prosecution 
failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the unlawful assembly had 
an intention to cause the death of deceased – Appellants entitled to beneﬁ t 
of doubt – Thus, the conviction u/s. 302 not sustainable and altered to one 
under s. 304 Part-II – Appellants sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 7 
years. [Paras 15, 19, 20, 23-27]
Penal Code, 1860 – s. 149 – Unlawful assembly – Scope and ambit 
of s. 149 :
Held: Every person constituting an unlawful assembly need not play 
an active role for convicting him with the aid of s. 149 – Prosecution has to 
establish that a person has to be one of the persons constituting the assembly 
and that he had entertained the common object along with the other members 
of the assembly, as deﬁ ned u/s. 141 – Whoever being aware of facts which 
render any assembly an unlawful assembly, intentionally joins that assembly, 
or continues in it, is said to be a member of unlawful assembly. [Para 14]
LISTS OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
Nand Lal and Others v. State of Chhattisgarh 2023 SCC OnLine SC 
262; Masalti v. State of U.P. [1964] 8 SCR 133; Lakshmi Singh and Others v. 
State of Bihar (1976) 4 SCC 394; State of Rajasthan v. Madho and Another 
1991 Supp (2) SCC 396; State of M.P. v. Mishrilal (Dead) and Others (2003) 
9 SCC 426; Nagarathinam and Others v. State Represented by Inspector of 
Police (2006) 9 SCC 57 – referred to.
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED 
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.524 
of 2021.
PARSHURAM v. STATE OF M.P.
188 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2023] 14 S.C.R.
From the Judgment and Order dated 14.03.2018 of the High Court of 
Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior in CRLA No.243 of 2005.
With
Criminal Appeal No.3416 of 2023.
Appearances:
A. Sirajudeen, Sr. Adv., Rishi Malhotra, Ms. N. Annapoorani, Advs. 
for the Appellant.
Dhirendra Singh Parmar, AAG, Abhimanyu Singh, Yashraj Singh 
Bundela, Susheel Tomar, Pawan, Ms. Jyoti Verma, Bhagwanjee Thakur, 
Advs. for the respondent.
JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT
JUDGMENT
B. R. GAVAI, J.
1. Leave granted in appeal arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 1718 of 
2022.
2. These appeals challenge the common judgment and order dated 14th 
March 2018, passed by the Division Bench of the High
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.