LexSTATE OF HARYANA versus SHIBU @ SHIV NARAIN AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 11 S.C.R. 361 'Y STATE OF HARYANA A v. SHIBU @ SHIV NARAIN AND ORS. (Criminal Appeal Nos.235-236 of 2001) JULY 25, 2008 B --' ,._ -t [DR. ARlilT PASAYAT, P. SATHASIVAM AND AFTAB ALAM, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: s. 302 rlw s. 34 - Three accused alleged to have attacked c and killed the victim - Conviction by trial court - Plea before High Court that it was a blind murder and witnesses were pro- cured later on - Acquittal by High Court - HELD: Judgment of 1 acquittal is to be in,terfered with only when there are compel- ling and substantial reasons - High Court has elaborately dis- D __,, -<( cussed the evidence and all aspects and rightly concluded that prosecution version was highly improbable and lacked credence - Appeal against acquittal. The prosecution case against the accused-respon- E dent was that on account of a previous quarrel between the, .d~ceased and accused-respondent no.1 in Criminal Appeal No. 23·5 of 2001, the accused armed with a 'pharsa' and a sword attacked the deceased. Accused-respondent no.1 caught hold of the deceased while the other two gave F a sword blow and a 'pharsa' blow on the thigh and leg ... respectively of the deceased. On hearing cries of the vie- tim, his brother (PW.5), cousin (PW 6) and another per- son reached the scene of occurrence. The victim sue- cumbed to his injuries on the way to hospital. The trial Court convicted the accused, who was said to have given G sword blow on the thigh of the deceased, u/s. 302 IPC and the other two accused u/s.302 read with 34 IPC. The . -~ case of the accused before the High Court was that it was a blind murder and the prosecution witnesses were pro- 361 H 362 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S.C.R. A · cured after the incident had come to light. The High Court acquitted all the accused. In the instant appeals filed by the State it was con- tended for the appellant that the accused had a motive for the crime and the evidence was cogent and credible, B · but the analysis done by the High Court was without any foundation and suffered from. serious infirmity. · _,._.... L r Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The principle to be followed by the ap- e pel\ate court considering the appeal against the judg- meli·t of acquittal ·is to interfere only when there are com- . palling· and substantial reasons for doing so. If the im- pugned judgment is clearly unreasonable and relevant and convincing materials have been unjustifiably elimi- D nated in the process, it is compelling reason for interfer- ence. [Para 9] (368-C-D] 1.2 The High court has elaborately discussed the ~vi dence and all the aspects to conclude that the prosecu- E, tiori version is highly improbable and Jacks credence. When ·the background facts as noticed by the High Court are tested on the touchstone of the principles set. out by this-court it is clear that the appeals· are without me~it. [Para ·8 and 1 O] [367 ·e-F 368-F] · ~ ·-. .... . • J, t F" . I 8hag~an Singh v. State ofM.P 2002(4) sec 85- relied on [para 9] ' ' I• . Joseph v. State of Kera/a 2003(1) SCC 465-:- :relied on [para 9] ·' · '1 G . ., .. pe,vatha Venkataswamy v. Public Prosecutor, High· Cour;t of A:P .200;3(10) sec 700- retied on [par~ ~l, .. ·;:i • Stafo1 Of Punjab v. Kamai/ Singh ·2003(11) ·sec 271- relied ofli(para 9] .. ' . . : -. ~ i • - ·. ' ' • . • State of UP v. Babu 2003(1'1) sec 280 - relied on [para 9] ..,.,. . • STATE OF HARYANA v. SHIBU @ SHIV 363 NARAIN & ORS. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] y Suchand Pal v. Phani Pal 2003(11) SCC 527 - relied A on [para 9] CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTIO~: Criminal Appeal Nos. 235-236 of 2001 From the final Judgment and Order dated 11/7/2000 of B -.; ,._..,, the High Court ·of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. A. ' No. 527-DB/1995 • Rajeev Gaur 'Naseem' and T.V. George for the Appellant. Naresh Kaushik and Lalita Kaushik for the Respondents. c Nagendra Rai, Rishi Malhotra and prem Malhotra for the Complainant. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. These appeals are directed D -<( against the common judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court disposing of appeals i.e. Criminal Ap- peal No. 52708 of 1995 and 547DB of 1995. The main judg- ment is in Criminal Appeal No. 527 DB of 1995. In these ap- peals two appellants were convicted by learned Sessions E Judge, Rohtak in Sessions Case No. 13 of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.