Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 446 (ALL)

State of U. P. v. Panna Lal Kushwaha @ Majhi

2023-02-14

MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, SIDDHARTHA VARMA

body2023
JUDGMENT : Manish Kumar Nigam, J. 1. Heard Shri Haripratap Gupta and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record. 2. A First Information Report was lodged on 05.01.2017 alleging that in the previous night the accused had killed Ramnath the father of the accused and the informant. The father of the accused Panna Lal Kushwaha, it has been stated the informant Vijay, was around 90 years of age and was being all the time pressurised by the accused Panna Lal to give money to him so that he could buy liquor, etc. It has also been stated in the First Information report that the brother of the first informant was a little mentally disbalanced. Upon the First Information Report being lodged, Case Crime No. 14 of 2017 under Section 304 IPC was registered. Investigation followed and thereafter charge-sheet was submitted. Thereafter the Court framed charges and trial commenced. After the trial when the case resulted in acquittal, the State filed the instant Government Appeal. 3. In the trial Court from the side of the prosecution PW-1 Vijay Kushwaha, PW-2 Keshav Khan, PW-3 Constable Ajay Kumar, PW-4 Dr. Parutosh Shukla, PW-5 Sub-Inspector Vijay Singh Yadav, PW-6 Sub-Inspector Nitesh Kumar were examined. Documentary evidence were there in the form of FIR, Chick Report, Spot Inspection, Panchayat Nama, Naksha Photonash, Challan of the dead body and the Post Mortem Report. 4. The accused has given his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and had denied the committing of the crime. 5. In his statement before the trial Court PW-1 who was the first informant had stated that the accused was staying with the deceased (father) and because PW-1 was all the time afraid of the fact that the accused Panna Lal would also indulge in Marpeet with him he used to stay away from the family. He has also stated that Panna Lal, the accused used to indulge in various types of intoxication and for that purpose he used to always demand money from his father and when that money was not given to him he used to indulge in Marpeet. 6. He has also stated that Panna Lal, the accused used to indulge in various types of intoxication and for that purpose he used to always demand money from his father and when that money was not given to him he used to indulge in Marpeet. 6. In the night of 04/05.01.2017 it was stated by him that Panna Lal had beaten the deceased Ramnath black and blue and when the first informant reached the house of the deceased in the morning he had found that the father was still breathing and he had also uttered that the Panna Lal had beaten him. The first informant had therefore rushed with his father to the hospital where he died on the way and consequently thereafter he had gone to lodge the First Information Report. PW-2 is another witness of fact. He has stated that he was having his lock and key shop in the neighborhood and in the night of 4/5.1.2017 he had crossed the house of the deceased Ramnath and had heard some verbal altercation taking place between the father and the son. The other prosecution witnesses were formal police witnesses. However, the learned A.G.A. since had laid stress on the statement of PW-4, who had proved the Post Mortem Report and had brought to the notice of the trial Court, the 12 injuries which were found on the body of the deceased. The PW-5 again is the Sub-Inspector who has proved the First Information Report and he was also the Investigating Officer. The court below after dealing with all the evidence which were led before it, concluded that the case was that of circumstantial evidence and after relying upon the case of Sharad Birdhi Chand vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 1984 (4) SCC 116 had found that as all the links to prove that the crime which had been committed by the accused were not being found the case had to result in an acquittal. It has also stated that substantially evidence were not such which would lead to the only conclusion that the crime had taken place on account of the fact that the accused had pre-planned the crime and thereafter had committed the same. It has also stated that substantially evidence were not such which would lead to the only conclusion that the crime had taken place on account of the fact that the accused had pre-planned the crime and thereafter had committed the same. Learned A.G.A. has argued that if the evidence which was there before the trial Court was looked into and specially the statement of PW-2 Keshav Khan then it would be clear that Keshav Khan had actually seen the crime being committed. 7. Having heard learned A.G.A. and after having gone through the record, the Court is of the view that the view taken by the trial Court was a possible view. 8. On a careful perusal of the judgment on record, we find that it cannot be said that the view taken by the Trial Court was perverse or unreasonable. Simply because another view might have been taken on the evidence available would not give us any ground for interfering with the order of acquittal. Unless the view taken by the Trial Court was a view which could not have been possibly taken on the basis of the evidence available on record, it cannot be said that the view taken by the Trial Court was not a reasonably possible view. In fact, the perusal of the statements of the witnesses definitely shows that the findings of the Trial Court were appropriate. 9. This Court which is sitting in appeal over a judgment of acquittal as per the judgment of the Supreme Court in Murlidhar alias Gidda & Anr. vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2014) 5 SCC 730 can only interfere in an appeal if the view taken by the Trial Court was not a view which was possible. Considering the inconsistencies, improvements and also the fact that essential ingredients to constitute the offence charged against the accused were not found to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, we are of the view that the Trial Court's view was definitely a possible view. Hence, the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 10. Under such circumstances, the Court is of the view that there is absolutely no error in the assessment of the Trial Court. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself and no leave to appeal is being granted.