RAMA DEVI versus THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

Citation: [2024] 10 S.C.R. 1313 · Decided: 03-10-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJIV KHANNA · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 10 S.C.R. 1313 : 2024 INSC 755
Rama Devi 
v. 
The State of Bihar and Others
(Criminal Appeal No(s). 2623-2631 of 2014)
03 October 2024
[Sanjiv Khanna,* Sanjay Kumar and R. Mahadevan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment 
of the trial court and acquitting the respondents of the charges 
punishable under Sections 302, 307, 333, 355 and 379, all read 
with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860, and Section 27 of the 
Arms Act, 1959.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 307, read with s.34 – Murder of 
an MLA and his bodyguard – Respondents convicted by Trial 
Court – Conviction reversed by High Court – Challenge to:
Held: In view of the evidence and materials on record, charges 
against A-4 and A-8 under Section 302 read with Section 34 
and Section 307 r/w Section 34 proved and established beyond 
reasonable doubt – Conviction and sentence awarded by the trial 
court affirmed and restored – However, benefit of doubt given 
to other accused persons as there is no direct ocular evidence 
implicating them and the charge of conspiracy is not substantiated, 
their acquittal upheld – Impugned judgment set aside. [Paras 42-45]
FIR – Delay in forwarding the copy to magistrate – When not 
fatal:
Held: The incident took place in the night of 13.06.1998 – 
14.06.1998 being a Sunday, the FIR was forwarded to the 
jurisdictional magistrate on 15.06.1998 – Thus, the delay in 
forwarding the copy of the FIR to the jurisdictional magistrate 
was explained – Mere delay by itself is not sufficient to discard 
and disbelieve the case of the prosecution unless the accused 
demonstrate how this delay has prejudiced their case – If the 
investigation starts in right earnest and there is sufficient material 
on record to show that the accused were named and pinpointed, 
*Author
1314
[2024] 10 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
the prosecution case can be accepted when evidence implicates 
the accused – The requirement to dispatch and serve a copy 
of the FIR to the jurisdictional magistrate is an external check 
against ante dating or ante timing of the FIR to ensure that there 
is no manipulation or interpolation in the FIR – Further, if the 
court finds the witnesses to be truthful and credible, the lack 
of a cogent explanation for the delay may not be regarded as 
detrimental. [Para 30]
Evidence – Non-recovery of vehicles and weapons used in 
the offence – Effect on credibility of eyewitnesses, if any:
Held: The ocular version of the witnesses should not be 
disregarded solely because the weapon used in the crime and 
the vehicles allegedly used by the accused were not located or 
seized by the police – On facts, the failure of the police to recover 
the vehicles and the weapons is not sufficient to undermine 
the credibility of the eyewitness accounts or the corroborative 
evidence regarding the cause of the homicidal deaths of both 
the deceased. [Para 27]
Evidence – Witness with criminal background – Courts to 
exercise caution but, evidence cannot be discarded merely 
on the ground of criminal background:
Held: Criminal background of a witness necessitates that the 
courts approach their evidence with caution – The testimony of a 
witness with a chequered past cannot be dismissed as untruthful 
or uncreditworthy without considering the surrounding facts and 
circumstances of the case, including their presence at the scene 
of the offence – In cases involving conflicts between rival gangs or 
groups, the testimony of members from either side is admissible and 
relevant – If the court is convinced of the veracity and truthfulness 
of such testimony, it may be considered – Courts assess the 
broader context to determine if there is sufficient corroboration, 
as long as there are no valid reasons to discredit the evidence – 
The crucial test is whether the witness is truly an eyewitness and 
whether their testimony is credible – If their presence at the scene 
is established beyond doubt, their account of the incident can be 
relied upon – Such evidence cannot be discarded merely on the 
grounds of criminal background. [Para 20]
Evidence – Presence of eyewitness (PW-1) at the place 
of occurrence (hospital) proven, however there was 
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 
1315
Rama Devi v. The State of Bihar and Others
non- compliance with hospital and prison protocols – Reliance 
on testimony of PW-1, if proper – MLA and his bodyguard were 
murdered in the hospital where the former was admitted

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