Blog Archives - Page 98 of 1710

16 Feb

Testimony and creditibility of Eyewitness Account, Unraveling Doubts in High-Stakes Acquittal Decision by Supreme Court

Prime Legal

TITLE: CHHOTE LAL v. ROHTASH & ORS.

CITATION: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2490 OF 2014

DECIDED ON: 14 DECEMBER 2023.

CORAM: JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA, JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL

Facts of the Case

The case at hand involves the appeal of Chhote Lal against the acquittal of six accused individuals by the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2490 of 2014. Originally, the trial court had convicted the accused for offenses under Sections 148, 201/149, and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), pertaining to the murder of Kishan Sarup. The incident, which occurred on November 4, 2000, was characterized by a historical enmity between two rival groups dating back to a 1986 dispute over access to a public road. The appellant, Chhote Lal, a former Delhi Police employee, alleged a sequence of events involving a car chase, assault, and abduction of the victim.

Issues Involved

Whether the High Court was correct in acquitting the accused based on the benefit of doubt. The reliability of the eyewitness account provided by the appellant/complainant (Chhote Lal), who was also the father of the deceased.

Legal Provisions

Sections 148, 201/149, and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were invoked in the case. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court must carefully examine the testimony of a sole eyewitness, especially when the witness has a personal interest in the outcome of the case.

Court’s Observation and Analysis

The key contention in the appeal was whether the High Court’s decision to acquit the accused based on the benefit of doubt was justified. The court considered the reliability of the appellant/complainant’s (Chhote Lal) eyewitness account, given his personal interest as the father of the deceased. The court observed that Chhote Lal’s presence during the incident was questionable, and his failure to intervene during the assault raised doubts about the credibility of his testimony. Furthermore, the court noted discrepancies, such as the absence of details about the use of a pistol despite evidence indicating firing from close range as the cause of death. The court emphasized the prosecution’s failure to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the High Court’s plausible decision to extend the benefit of doubt to the accused. Consequently, on December 14, 2023, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court’s acquittal of the six accused individuals.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Komal Goswami

Click to read the judgement

16 Feb

Supreme court disapproves charges against constable wrongly accused for forgery marksheet

Prime Legal

Blog #SC #primelegal #cheating #forgerry #markssheet

Title: RAM LAL V STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7935 OF 2023

Dated on: 4.12.2023

Corum: HON’BLE JUSTICE JK MAHESWARI & JUSTICE K.V VISWANATHAN

Facts of the case

In the present case Ram Lal, the appellant, worked as a constable and faced dismissal. His dismissal was based on an alleged change of his birth date. Specifically, he was suspected of changing his birthday from 21.04.1974 to 21.04.1972 on his 8th grade marksheet. This change was supposedly made to qualify for recruitment. It is also to be noted that Ram Lal had previously been convicted of cheating in a trial court. He was eventually acquitted by an appellate court. Five witnesses were examined during the departmental hearing, and the Enquiry Officer determined that the charges were proven. The same claim was made in both the departmental and criminal cases. The appellant was acquitted in the criminal trial when the prosecution failed to establish the charge. The original 8th grade marksheet, the date of birth, and the prosecution evidence were critical in both the criminal trial and the departmental investigation.

Issues raised

(a) whether the dismissal order was justified based on the departmental enquiry?

(b) what was the effect of the acquittal order on the dismissal order?

Legal provision

In the present case the appellant was charged with:

Section 420: Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.

Section 467: Forgery of valuable security, will, etc

Section 468: Forgery for purpose of cheating

Section 471: Using as genuine a forged document or electronic record

The appellant in the instant case was charged with the above sections for allegedly providing documents that had false records of his Date of birth. It was alleged that this was done to project himself as having attained majority at the time of the recruitment.

Court analysis and Judgement

The Supreme Court approved the appeal and overturned the dismissal order. It ruled that the departmental investigation was tainted by omitting significant and material information, such as the original 8th standard marksheet and the investigating officer’s statement, which demonstrated that there was no change in the date of birth. It further determined that the acquittal ruling was based on a thorough examination of the prosecution’s evidence and that the charge was not only not proven, but also disproven. It further found that permitting the dismissal order to remain would be unreasonable, unfair, and oppressive, because the charges were similar, and the evidence, witnesses, and circumstances were the same in both proceedings. The Court also ordered the appellant’s restoration with all attendant advantages, including seniority, notional promotions, wage adjustment, and other benefits3. It also granted the appellant 50% of the back wages.

Written by- Namitha Ramesh

Click here to view judgement

16 Feb

Land possession dispute : Supreme court upholds Doctrine of judicial discipline

Prime Legal

Blog #landdispute #SC #judicialseperation #primelegal

Title: MARY PUSHPAM V TELVI CURUSUMARY & ORS.

Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO.9941 OF 2016

Dated on: 3.1.2024

Corum: HON’BLE JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH & JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

Facts of the case

The appellant filed a civil complaint for declaration of title, possession, and permanent injunction against the respondents, who had previously filed a suit for the appellant’s ejectment in 1976 and lost in all courts. High Court Judgment: In the first round of litigation, the High Court ruled that the appellant had perfected her title by adverse possession of the suit property, which consisted of 8 cents of land and a house. The respondents did not appeal the decision further. Errors by the Trial and High Courts: In the second round of litigation, the Trial Court and the High Court broke judicial discipline by confining the ruling in Favor of the appellant to their homes rather than the entire land, contrary to judgement of HC.

Issues

Whether the suit property properly absolutely belongs to the plaintiffs?
Whether the decision of the Honourable High Court of Madras in relates to the entire 8 cents of the suit property or whether it pertains to the house
in a portion of the suit property?
Whether the plaintiffs have been in possession and enjoyment of the entire suit
property?
Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for?
Whether the suit property is to be demarcated and northern boundary is put
up as prayed for?
What reliefs are the Plaintiffs entitled to?

In the said case the court had to address the said issued regarding the property and land of the appellants.

Court analysis and judgement

The Hon’ble SC court in the said case allowed the appeal and held that since the court was unable to appreciate the said argument of the respondents. Suit for possession has to describe the property in question with accuracy and all details of measurement and boundaries. This was completely lacking. A suit for possession with respect to such a property would be liable to be dismissed on the ground of its identifiability. The court upheld the First Appellate Court’s decision, which determined that the appellant was entitled to the whole suit property. The Supreme Court stressed the relevance of the merger concept and the principles of judicial discipline.

Written by- Namitha Ramesh

Click here to view judgement

16 Feb

The collective action of all the accused indicates sharing of common intention: Supreme Court.

Prime Legal

blog, Blog #accused, #criminalappeal, #intention, #SupremeCourt

Case title: Ram Naresh vs State of U.P

Case no.: Criminal Appeal No. 3577 Of 2023

Decided on: 1.12.2023

Quorum: Hon’ble Justice Abhay S. Oka, Hon’ble Justice Pankaj Mithal

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The present appeal arises from the trial court’s judgement and order convicting and sentencing the appellant to life imprisonment for an offence under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as the High Court’s affirmance of the same.

ISSUE RAISED:

Whether the appellant and the other co-accused had a common intention to kill the deceased?

LEGAL PROVISIONS:

According to Section 34 of the IPC, when several people commit a criminal act with the same intention, each person is liable for that act as if he did it alone. As a result, if the accused’s participation in a crime is proven, as well as the common intention, Section 34 of the IPC will apply. Section 34 IPC does not require a prior conspiracy or premeditated mind. Even during the incident, i.e. during the commission of the crime, a common intention can emerge.

APPELLANTS CONTENTION:

The appellant argued that the trial court did not consider any evidence to record a finding of “common intention” on the appellant’s part, and thus Section 34 IPC could not be used to convict him. He went on to say that the evidence on the subject has not even been discussed by the High Court.

COURT ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT:

The court determined that the evidence on record proves beyond a doubt that the accused persons attacked the deceased with the intent to kill him. The fact that they were all related and armed when they arrived at the scene indicates that they intended to kill him.
It stated that the accused had arrived on the scene collectively and delivered serious vital blows to the deceased with the weapons they were armed with, resulting in his death. The collective action of all the accused indicated a shared intention.

The argument that the appellant cannot be found guilty by using Section 34 IPC to support his or her conviction is without merit and cannot be upheld in light of the evidence in the record as well as the decisions made by the trial and high courts. As a result, the appeal is rejected without merit.

Written by – Surya Venkata Sujith

Click to read the judgement

16 Feb

Inquiry Officer’s findings are generally not interfered, still they can be challenged if they are perverse: Supreme Court

Prime Legal

Blog #investigationofficer #evidenceact #indianconstitution #supremecourt

Title: CHATRAPAL THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO(s)._______ OF 2024 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 11975/2019)

Date of Judgment: FEBRUARY 15, 2024

Coram: Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra

Facts of the Case:

The present appeal before the Supreme Court of India arises from a judgment and order dated 08.01.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition (C) No. 297 of 2008. The appellant, who was initially appointed on a permanent basis as Ardly (a class IV Post) in the Bareilly Judgeship, was subsequently transferred and posted as a Process Server in the Nazarat of an outlying court in Baheri, District Bareilly on 24.08.2001. Upon joining the new post, the appellant found that he was being paid the remuneration of Ardly, not the appropriate salary for the position of Process Server. In 2003, the appellant made representations to various authorities, including the District Judge, regarding the discrepancy in his salary and alleged harassment by the Central Nazir demanding illegal gratification to settle his dues.

Despite the appellant’s grievances, the matter escalated when the appellant was placed under suspension by the District Judge on 21.06.2003, followed by the initiation of a departmental inquiry. The charges against the appellant included the use of inappropriate language and making false allegations against officers, as well as communicating with higher authorities without following proper channels. The Inquiry Officer concluded that the charges were established, leading to the appellant’s dismissal on 30.04.2007.

Subsequently, the appellant appealed the dismissal, which was dismissed by the High Court on 19.09.2007. The appellant then filed Writ Petition (C) No. 297 of 2008 before the High Court, challenging the order of dismissal. However, this petition was also dismissed, prompting the appellant to appeal to the Supreme Court.

In this appeal before the Supreme Court, the appellant challenges the dismissal orders issued by the Disciplinary Authority and upheld by both the High Court and the Administrative Judge of the High Court of Allahabad. The appellant contends that the dismissal was unjustified and that the charges against him were not proven. The appellant seeks relief from the Supreme Court, arguing that the dismissal was erroneous and should be overturned.

Laws Involved:

Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India
Indian Evidence Act

Issue framed by the Court:

Whether the appellant was prejudiced due to lack of access to certain documents?

Courts Judgment and Analysis:

The court’s analysis revolves around several legal points raised by both the appellant’s counsel and the counsel representing the High Court. The appellant’s counsel argued that the charges against the appellant were vague, the punishment was disproportionate to the guilt, and the appellant was prejudiced due to lack of access to certain documents. Moreover, they contended that the findings of guilt were perverse. To support these arguments, reliance was placed on precedents such as ‘Sawai Singh vs. State of Rajasthan’ and ‘Santosh Bakshi vs. State of Punjab’.

In contrast, the counsel for the High Court contended that the charges were specific and not vague, highlighting the appellant’s history of making false allegations against senior officers.

Upon careful consideration of the arguments and perusal of the case papers, the court scrutinized the charges against the appellant. The first charge involved allegations of misconduct and insubordination, including the use of inappropriate language and false accusations against officials. The court found that the finding of the Inquiry Officer regarding the appellant’s statement in his application was based on a misinterpretation, leading to a perverse finding. Additionally, the court noted that the appellant did not directly make allegations of discrimination on a caste basis, as it was the Central Nazir who made such statements. The Inquiry Officer’s findings on this charge were thus deemed flawed.

Regarding the second charge, which pertained to sending representations directly to higher authorities without following the proper channel, the court observed that while this action may constitute a minor offense, termination from service was deemed excessive, especially considering examples of similar actions by other employees that did not result in termination.

The court referred to legal precedents such as Union of India vs. P. Gunasekaran, State of Haryana vs. Rattan Singh, and Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board vs. T.T. Murali Babu to emphasize principles regarding the role of appellate courts in disciplinary proceedings. It emphasized that while findings of an Inquiry Officer are generally not interfered with, they can be challenged if based on perverse findings.

In conclusion, considering the flaws in the Inquiry Officer’s findings and the disproportionate punishment imposed, the court set aside the judgment of the High Court and the termination order, reinstating the appellant with all consequential benefits.

Written by- Aditi

Click here to view the judgment

1 … 96 97 98 99 100 … 1,710