LexRAMVILAS versus STATE OF M.P.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2015] 9 S.C.R. 205 RAMVILAS v. STATE OF M.P. (Criminal Appeal Nos.1.786-1787 of 2009) AUGUST 18, 2015 [T.S. THAKUR AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: s.302 rlw s. 149, 324, 323 rlw s. 149 A B and 148 - Murder - Victim-deceased attacked by the c appellants and other accused by lathis, pistol and spears - When his family members tried to save !Jim, they also received injuries - Deceased succumbed to injuries - Conviction by courts below - On appeal, held: All the eye witnesses consistently spoke about the occurrence and the D overt acts of the accused including the appellant - Courts below recorded the concurrent findings of fact observing that the testimony of eye witnesses was credible and trustworthy - Prosecution witnesses being injured, their presence at the place of incident cannot be doubted- Conviction of appellant E · was based on evidence of injured witnesses which was amply corroborated by the evidence of eye-witnesses .and medical evidence - Interference with order of conviction not called for. Evidence: Injured witness - Testimony of, evidentiary value- Held: Evidence of injured witnesses is entitled to great weight and very cogent and convincing grounds are required to discard such evidence. Dismissing the appeals, the Court F G HELD: 1. In the incident, PW-3 and PW-5, sister of the deceased sustained injuries. PW-3 and PW-5 being injured witnesses, their presence at the time and place H 205 206 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015) 9 S.C.R. A of occurrence cannot be doubted. Evidence of the injured witnesses is entitled to a great weight and very cogent and convincing grounds are required to discard the evidence of the injured witnesses. There is no ground to disbelieve the evidence of injured witnesses B PW-3 and PW-5. [Para 6] [209-E-F] 2. As observed by the High Court all the eye witnesses have spoken in one voice so far as carrying of 'katta' by appellant and, therefore, his presence at the c scene of occurrence cannot be doubted merely because no 'katta' was recovered from him. It came out in the evidence that the appellant had exhorted the other accused in attacking the deceased and also actually participated in the attack. As pointed out by the courts D below that the appellant nowhere pleaded in his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that he was . neither present at the scene of occurrence nor involved in the incident. The conviction of the appellant is based E on the evidence of injured witnesses which is amply corroborated by the evidence of eye witnesses and medical evidence. Conviction of the appellant is based on proper appreciation of evidence and courts below have recorded concurrent findings and the same is not F liable to be interfered with in exercise of power under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. [Paras 7, 8] [209- · H; 210-A-D] CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal G Appeal Nos. 1786-1787 of2009 From the Judgment and Order dated 09.10.2007 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at _Jabalpur in Criminal Application Nos. 377 and 481of1995 "' WITH H Crl. A No. 1788-1789 of 2009 .. RAMVILAS v. STATE OF M.P. 207 ·Ajay Veer Singh, R.K. Verma, Rakesh KumarKhare,Atul A Agrawal, Naresh Kumar, Mohd. lrshad HaniffortheAppellant. Arjun Garg, Mishra Saurabh for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. In these appeals, the appellants challenge the correctness of the judgment passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Criminal Appeals No.377 of 1995 and 481 of 1995 whereby the Hig~ Court confirmed the conviction and sentence awprded to the C appellants by the trial court under Sections 302 read with Section 149 IPC, 324, 323 read with Section 149 IPC and 148 IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution is that on 23:07.1991 D at about 7.00 O'clock in the morning at village Hathighat, deceased-Bansilal had gone towards the riverside to attend nature's call. One Harisingh Kachhi (PW-7), Jagdish (PW- 13) and Noor Khan (PW-9) came to the house of Narmada E Prasad (PW-3) and informed him that the accused-appellants were assaulting his brother-Bansilal. Narmada Prasad (PW- 3) immediately rushed to the spot alongwith them and near 'otla' of Hardul Baba, he noticed that all the appellants armed with lethal weapons had surrounded his brother-Bansilal. F Appellants Chhotelal, Kailash and Suresh were armed with spears, appellant-Ramvilas was armed with pi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.