STATE OF U.P versus GOVIND DAS@ GUDDA AND ANR.

Citation: [2007] 8 S.C.R. 968 · Decided: 10-08-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

) 
).· 
A 
STATEOFU.P. 
.,... 
'-.. 
v. 
GOVIND DAS@ GUDDA AND ANR. 
AUGUST 10, 2007 
B 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND D.K. JAIN, JJ.] 
Penal Code, I 860: 
-+. 
c 
ss.302134-Trial Court acquitting one accused-Another accused 
sentenced to death and rest awarded life imprisonment-Appeal and reference 
relating to death sentence-High Court set aside conviction-On appeal, 
held, approach of High Court is unsustainable-Mere fact that co-accused 
had been acquitted is not sufficient to discard prosecution version in its 
totality-While setting aside order of Conviction, High Court ought to have 
D analysed the evidence to show as to how the conclusion of trial Court as 
regards acceptability of evidence of any witness was erroneous-That has 
not been done-Matter remitted to High Court for fresh consideration. 
; 
t-
The Sessions Judge had convicted the respondents for offence 
punishable under s.302 r/w. s.34 IPC. Each of the accused persons were 
E sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. Respondent No.I was sentenced to 
death for offence punishable under s.302 IPC. Another accused 'S' was 
acquitted by the trial Court. The two accused persons preferred appeals before 
the High Court and reference was made relating to death sentence awarded. 
By the impugned order, the High Court found the accused persons innocent 
F 
and set aside the conviction and sentence awarded. Hence these appeals. 
Partly allowing the appeals and remitting the matter to High Court, the 
\ 
Court 
HELD: The approach of the High Court is clearly unsupportable. It 
G 
did not bother to even analyse the evidence and/or to refer to any finding 
recorded by the trial court as to in what way the evidence was not acceptable. 
The mere fact that the co-accused had been acquitted is not sufficient to discard 
the prosecution version in its totality. It is not understood as to what was 
meant by the High Court by stating that there was no corroboration of 
,,: 
'investigation'. This is not the way an appeal or reference for confirmation of 
H 
968 
\ ,. 
STATEOFU.P. v. GOVINDDAS@GUDDA[PASAYAT,J.] 
969 
death sentence is to be dealt with. When the High Court was setting aside A 
the order of conviction·the least that was required to be done was analysis of 
the evidence to show as to how the conclusions of the trial Court as regards 
acceptability of the evidence of any witness was erroneous. That apparently 
has not been done. (Para 4) (970-E, F, GI 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal Nos. I 049- B 
1050of2007. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.05.2005 of the High Court of 
Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No. 4978 of 2002 and Criminal 
Appeal No. 5234 of 2002 and Reference No. 8 of 2002. 
Sahdev Singh, Javed Mahmud Rao and Shahid Ali Rao for the Appellants. 
Sanjay Jain, Anand Thakral, Mukesh Tyagi and Aditya Kumar for the 
Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYA T, J. I. Leave granted. 
c 
D 
2. These appeals are against the judgment of the Division Bench of the 
Allahabad High Court by which it directed acquittal of the respondents. 
Before the High Court the respondents had questioned correctness of the E 
judgment passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, convicting the 
respondents for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 
34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') Each of the accused w~s 
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.20,000/- with default 
stipulation. Respondent-Govind Das was sentenced to death for an offence p 
punishable under Section 302 IPC. It is to be noted that there were two 
deceased persons; one was Loknath and the other was Naval Kishore. Accused 
Sushila was acquitted by the trial Court. Since accused Govind Das was 
awarded death sentence, the matter was referred to the High Court for 
confirmation of the sentence. The two accused persons preferred appeals 
before the High Court and a reference was made relating to death sentence G 
awarded. By the impugned order, the High Court found the accused persons 
innocent and set aside the conviction and sentence awarded. 
3. Though many points were urged in support of the appeals, we find 
it unnecessary to go into those because of the casual and summary way of H 
970 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007) 8 S.C.R. 
A disposal of the two appeals and the reference relating to the death sentence. 
B 
c 
The High Court after analyzing the evidence and stand of the accused persons 

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