SHAMIM RAHMANI ETC. versus STATE OF U.P.

Citation: [1975] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 315 · Decided: 28-04-1975 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.L. UNTWALIA · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

, 
. y 
-~.£~-
315 
•. 
SHAMIM RAHMANI ETC. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. 
April 28, 1975 
[N. L. UNTWALIA ANDS. M. FAzAL ALI, JJ] 
B 
Penal Code-S. 201-Ascertaining full facts before giving inforn1ation to 
,po/ice--lf obligatory. 
· 
The appelJants were brother and sister and were living in different loc;llities 
,of the city. The sister developed illicit intimacy with the deceased, but finding 
that he was not giving her exclusive _ attenion, fired a shot at him when he 
C 
.came to her house. 
On hearing about the incident the brother gave information to the police 
that his younger brother had told him that he "did not know how his 
sister took his (appellant's) gun outside and somehow a fire. was shot" and 
that the bullet hit the deceased who bad fallen and was bleeding. 
The trial court convicted the sister under s. 302, I.P.C·. The brother was 
D 
charged with an offence· under s. 201, I.P.C. and was convicted and sentenced 
to three years' rigofOus imprisonment. 
The High Court affirmed the con-
·victions but ·reduced the sentence against the brother to one year. 
Dismissing the appeal of the sister and allowing the appeal of the brother, 
HELD :· All the ingredients necessary to be established for bringing home 
the charge under s. 201, to the appellant ·were not proved beyond reasonable 
E 
doubt. 
He may have known or may have reason to believe that an offence 
·of murder bad been committed by his sister. 
But the other possibility that 
be may" not have known or may have not reason to believe that the offence 
of murder had' been committed by his sister could not be ruled out. 
~ He 
may have only suspected. More facts were yet to be known .. He. did nothing 
wrong in rushing to the police station and giving the baieit information in 
writing. 
The prosecution could not unfold that the younger 
brother had 
iold anything further to the appeUant. 
It was not obligatoiy or necessary 
F 
:for_ the appeUant to probe the matter any further on the spot before rushing 
to the police station. 
[326 GH 327-B-DJ 
Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction : Criminal Appeals Nos. 121-
1.23 of 1973 . 
Appeal by special 
leave from the judgment and 
order dated 
10-4-J 973 of the Allahabad High Court in Crl. Appeal Nos. 2224 
G 
,& 2228 of 1969 and Cr. M. P. No. 1547 of 1973. 
Yogeshwar Prasad, Keshava Sahai, S. K. Bagga, S. Bagga, Rani 
Arorrt and Meena Bhatia, for the appellants. 
D. P. Uniyal and 0. P. Rana; for the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
' 
UNTWALIA, _J., These ar\' three appeals by special leave. 
One 
·of them was directed from some interlocutory order of the High Court 
and had become infructuous. Mr. Yogeshwar Prasad, learned counsel 
for the appellants asked us to dismiss tha,t appeal as being infruc-
tuous. We accordingly do so. In one of the remaining two appeals 
the appellant is Kumari Shamim Rahmani. 
She has been convicted 
H 
:16 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1975] SUPP. S.C.R. 
A under section 302 Indian Penal Code for committing the murder of 
Dr. Hari Om Gautam. 
A sentence of life imprisonment has been 
awarded to her. 
In the other appeal the appellant is Shri Amir 
Ahmad Rahmani, elder brother· of Shamim. He is said to have lodged 
a false information at the Police S1<1tion in connection with the said 
murder with the intention of screening his sister from legal punish-
B ment. He has been convicted under section 201 of the Penal Code. 
The Trial Judge imposed a sentence of three years' rigorous im-
prisonment on him but the High Court has reduced it to one year. 
The murder of the Doctor was the culmination of the wrong and 
vicious path of love and lust between him .a.nd appellant Shamim. 
As is not uncommon in such type of love affairs, the girl found the 
C 
arms of her lover getting loose and cold. It resulted in her frustration. 
In a jealous and revengeful attitude she used her arms on a gun 
and shot her lover dead. 
Thus she landed herself in the long arms 
of law and suffered the conviction for murder. We may observe at 
the outset that in the conduct of the case on behalf of the appellants 
in the Trial Court as also in the High Court there has been over-
D doing and too much hair splitting but all in vain. On reading the two· 
judgments of the Courts below and on perusal of the relernnt mate-
rials and pieces of evidence in· the case and after hearing the fair 
and able argument of Mr. Yogeshwar Prasad we have come to the 
conclusion that not only Shamim's appeal is conclu
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.