Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 743-744 of 2002
PETITIONER:
State of Madhya Pradesh
RESPONDENT:
Chamru @ Bhagwandas etc.etc
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/06/2007
BENCH:
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT & D.K. JAIN
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
1. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment rendered
by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court,
Jabalpur directing acquittal of the respondents. The Trial
Court had found the accused Chamru guilty of offences
punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 324 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘the IPC’). He was awarded death
penalty for the quadruple murders. Accused Geetabai was
awarded life imprisonment for offence punishable under
Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC along with sentence of
fine. They were both sentenced to ten years’ rigorous
imprisonment and three years’ rigorous imprisonment on the
other two heads of charge along with various sums of fine.
Both accused challenged their conviction and sentence and
filed appeals. The Trial Court made a reference to Section 366
of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short ‘the Code’) for
confirmation of the death sentence. The High Court found the
prosecution version to be not cogent and credible and directed
acquittal. It may be noted that there was a gruesome murder
of four persons. Two of them were minors. Though the High
Court was conscious of this fact, yet, it found the evidence of
the witnesses to be not credible and cogent and, patently
unreliable and, therefore, directed acquittal.
2. The prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows:
Sometime prior to this incident, deceased Ramkishan
and his wife deceased Anita were given three acres of land by
the latter’s father Sevaklal (PW-5). Since then Ramkishan
lived in the farmhouse along with his wife and four minor
children, namely, eldest son Kapil, aged about 12 years,
daughter Keerti, Son Bantu and the youngest child Preeti,
aged about 7 years. This land was earlier cultivated by
Gendalal, the father-in-law of Sevaklal (P.W.5) and after the
death of Gendalal, his sons Mangdu and his wife accused
Geetabai continued in possession. These fields were later
taken back from Mangdu by Sevaklal and out of it, 3 acres
were given to his daughter deceased Anita and one acre was
given to Gendalal’s widow, who sold it off for her daughter’s
marriage. This had enraged Geetabai and her husband who
used to abuse Anita and her husband Ramkishan. After her
husband’s death Geetabai had developed friendly relations
with accused Chamru, and the two of them perpetrated this
dastardly crime in furtherance of their common intention.
3. Both accused Chamru and Geetabai went to the house of
Ramkishan at the dead of night and Chamru hacked
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
Ramkishan, his wife and children one by one while they were
sleeping in their courtyard. Two of the children namely, Keerti
(P.W.3) and Bantu (P.W.7) were badly injured, but they could
be saved after prolonged hospitalisation. These two children,
and Ramkishan’s niece Indu Patel (PW-8) who was on a visit to
his place, are said to have witnessed the crime.
4. The first information report (Ex.P-4) was lodged next
morning by village Patel Bhupatsingh (P.W.2). This set the
investigation in motion. Dr. A.K. Yadu (P.W.9) performed the
autopsy and Ex.P/17-A to Ex.P-20-A are the postmortem
reports. He testified that all these persons died a homicidal
death.
5. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed
and the accused faced trial. The Trial Court placed reliance on
the identification made by Keerti, PW-3, Bantu, PW-7 and
Indu, PW-8 for the purpose of recording conviction. All the
three were child witnesses. It was claimed by the prosecution
at the Test Identification Parade (in short ‘the T.I. Parade’) that
they had identified the accused Chamru. Finding their
evidence to be cogent and credible, the Trial Court recorded
the conviction and sentenced the accused, as noted above.
6. In support of the appeal before the High Court, it was
highlighted by learned counsel appearing for the accused
persons that the Test Identification Parade was nothing but a
farce. The accused was shown to the witnesses before the T.I.
Parade and this was accepted by the witnesses. Additionally,
the evidence of PW-3 was not worthy of acceptance because of
apparent contradictions. Learned counsel for the State
supported the conviction and stated that when four persons,
including two children have lost their lives, such technicalities
should not stand on the way of convicting them.
7. The High Court considered the evidence and noted that
the accused was not a stranger to the children. In fact, they
admitted that he had worked at their father’s house in
connection with the construction of a room. They also
admitted that they had known him as "Pathar Fodne Wala".
In spite of this, there was no mention about identity of the
accused in the statements made during investigation. In
addition, if they knew the accused, there was no question of
any Test Identification Parade. The High Court recorded the
following findings after analyzing the evidence:
"We have carefully gone through the
evidence and documents on record and we
must say that the arguments advanced by the
learned defence counsel cannot be said to be
without substance. We accept the evidence of
Indu (P.W.8) that she had dodged the assailant
and somehow escaped into the kitchen. We
are also prepared to accept her testimony that
she had dodged the assailant and somehow
escaped into the kitchen. We are also
prepared to accept her testimony that she had
seen the assault from her place of hiding. But
that she had recognised the assailant to be
this accused Chamru is a difficult pill to
swallow. There is much force in the argument
that if she had really recognized the accused
that night, she would not have hesitated in
disclosing it to the villagers and to the police
when they arrived on the scene. She would
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
not have told the village Patel that some
stranger had attacked these people.
The same criticism applies to Keerti
(P.W.3)and Bantu (P.W.7). Bantu in fact was
assaulted while he was asleep. He admitted
this in para 11 of his cross examination. He
woke up after the blow on his neck, but
pretended to be asleep even after the attack on
him. He must have been taken as dead to
have been spared by the assailant after a
single blow. Bantu was a child aged about 7
years. He must have been too dazed and
frightened to be able to understand what was
happening. It appears to us to be highly
unlikely that he recognized the person who
was hacking his near and dear ones one after
the other. We are unable to accept his claim
that he had recognized Chamru that night.
Had this been true, he would have told the
Village Patel and others that the "Pathar Fodne
Wala" had committed the crime. The fact that
he did not do so goes to show that he could
not recognize the assailant that night.
This significant omission appears in the
statement Ex.D.3 made by Keerti (P.W.3) also
before the Police. She says that accused
Chamru was very well known to her by face
whom she knew as the "Pathar Fodne Wala"
who had worked for her father. Then what
prevented her from disclosing his identity to
the witnesses and the police when they arrived
on the spot?
We also agree with the contention of the
learned defence counsel that the identification
proceedings held by S.D.M. Shri Patel (P.W.1)
were only a farce. Both Bantu (P.W.7) and
Indu (P.W.8) admitted in cross-examination
that the Police had shown them the
photograph of Chamru. This would render the
entire proceedings as useless. And conviction
cannot be based on such evidence".
8. Though it was pointed out by the prosecution that there
were blood stains on the clothes, the High Court found that
they were so small that they were not found sufficient in
relation to Serological examination. The High Court noted
with anguish that there was cold blooded murder of four
persons including two children; but the deficient manner in
which the investigation was carried out, left much to be
desired.
9. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the
appellant-State submitted that the approach of the High Court
was erroneous. Merely because the child witnesses, who were
over-powered by the grief of seeing four murders before their
own eyes, made omission to state the name of the assailants
that should not have been treated as vital. Defective
investigation cannot be a ground to discard credible evidence.
10. We find that it is not merely a case of non-mention of the
names. Undisputedly, the photographs of accused Chamru
were shown to two of the child witnesses before the Test
Identification Parade. That took away the effect of the Test
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
Identification Parade. Learned counsel for the appellant has
referred to the evidence of PW-3 to contend that the she was
not shown the photographs. Even a bare perusal of her
evidence in court shows that she was not a credible witness
and was tutored. She has categorically stated that she knew
the accused by name. As noted above, her evidence also shows
that she was tutored. For example, the voltage of the bulb
which was supposed to be lighted at a distance of about 200
yards was stated to have been seen by her. Most of her
statements in court were exaggerations and embellishments.
Secondly, most of the vital facts were not stated during
investigation.
11. It is of significance to note that in her evidence, she
stated that Indu, PW-8 was also assaulted by the assailants.
This is clearly contrary to the prosecution version. All other
witnesses, who claimed to be eye-witnesses, have categorically
stated that PW-8 had managed to go away and had seen the
occurrence from behind the screen. That was also the version
of Indu (PW-8). That being so, the version of PW-3 that she
was also attacked, is clearly a vulnerable point so far as the
prosecution case is concerned.
12. In the ultimate analysis, the judgment of the acquittal
passed by the High Court does not suffer from any infirmity to
warrant interference. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.