The High Court refused leave to appeal in a criminal matter where the trial court acquitted respondents of murder charges. The appellate court held the acquittal was based on cogent evidence and the prosecution failed to prove the death was unnatural, requiring no interference.
Leave to appeal against the acquittal was refused.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 4
In Re : Criminal Misc. (Leave to Appeal) Application No. ......... of 2018.
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 556 of 2018
Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Liyakat And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant.
By means of this application, the applicant is seeking leave to appeal against the impugned judgement and order dated 13.02.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special (S.C./S.T. Act) in S.T. No. 199 of 2014 (State Vs. Liyakat and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 38 of 2014, under Sections 147, 302/149 and 201 I.P.C. by which accused-respondents have been acquitted of all the charges.
From the perusal of the impugned judgement and order, it transpires that on the basis of written report Ext. Ka1 given by P. W. 1 (informant) Mohd. Tahsin at Police Station Ramala, Ditrict Baghpat on 12.03.2014 stating therein that his sister Afsana (deceased) was having an affair with Mohsin, respondent no. 4 but he had settled the marriage of his sister in Village Deen Nazafgarh, Haryana. In the evening of 11.3.2014 at about 10 P.M. he and his family members including Afsana had gone to sleep in their house and when they got up on 12.03.2014 at about 5:30 A.M., they found that Afsana was missing on which his mother
Smt. Asgari went to the house of Mohsin and enquired about Afsana from the accused-respondents but they expressed their ignorance on which his mother came back to her house and then informant, Mohd. Tahsin and his mother again went back to the house of the accusedrespondents and started searching deceased-Afsana in the house of accused-respondents and in one of the rooms on the terrace of the house of Mohsin, they discovered the dead body of Afsana lying on the bed covered with a sheath. They suspect that the accused-respondents had committed the murder of his sister.
On the basis of the aforesaid written report Ext. Ka1, Case Crime No. 38 of 2014, under Sections 147, 302/149 and 201 IPC was registered against all the accused-respondents at Police Station Ramala, District Baghpat.
After registration of the case, Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence and prepared site plan Ext. Ka10. Thereafter, he conducted the inquest on the dead body of the deceased-Afsana and prepared inquest report Ext. Ka2 and other related documents namely letter addressed to R.I., Ext. Ka6, challan nash, Ext. Ka7, letter addressed to C.M.O. Ext. Ka8 and photo nash, Ext. Ka9. The dead body of the deceased-Afsana was thereafter dispatched for conducting postmortem. The postmortem on the dead body of the deceased-Afsana was performed by P. W. 7 Dr. Raghunandan Das Jindal who prepared and proved her postmortem report as Ext. Ka12. P. W. 7 Dr. Raghunandan
Das Jindal had noted following ante mortem injuries on the dead body of the deceased-Afsana :
"Injury no. 1-Abrasion about 3.5 cm x 2 cm around the neck, 5 cm below from the chin, 4 cm below from left ear, just below from right ear, 6 cm below from occiput.
Injury no. 2- 10 cm x 4 cm contusion on the right side of the face.
Injury no. 3- 8 cm x 7 cm contusion on the left side of the face.
Injury no. 4- 4 cm x 1 cm abrasion on the right side of right thigh.
Injury no. 5- 4 cm x 1.5 cm abrasion on the left side thigh.
Injury no. 6- 2 cm x 1 cm abrasion above the elbow of left hand."
But P. W. 7 Dr. Raghunandan Das Jindal was of the opinion that the injuries noted by him on the dead body of the deceased-Afsana were not sufficient to cause her death. The viscera of the deceased was preserved but the viscera report also did not indicate any abnormality.
The investigating officer after completing the investigation submitted charge sheet against all the accusedrespondents before CJM, Baghpat who committed the case for trial of the accused to the Court of Sessions Judge Baghpat where it was registered as S.T. No. 199 of 2014 and made over from there for trial to the Court of
Additional Sessions Judge/Special (S.C./S.T. Act) who on the basis of the material on record after hearing the prosecution as well as the accused, framed charge under Sections 147, 302/149, 201 I.P.C. against the accusedrespondents who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 7 witness of whom P. W. 1 (informant) Mohd. Tahsin, P. W. 2 Yameen and P. W. 3 Smt. Najma were examined as witnesses of fact while P. W. 4 Constable (Retd.) Dharamveer Singh who had prepared the chek FIR and the corresponding G.D. entry and proved the same as Ext. Ka4 and Ext. Ka5, P. W. 5 Bijendra Singh Pawar, S.I. who had conducted the inquest proceedings and prepared the inquest report Ext. Ka2 and other related documents namely letter addressed to R.I., Ext. Ka6, challan nash, Ext. Ka7, letter addressed to C.M.O. Ext. Ka8 and photo nash, Ext. Ka9, P. W. 6 Inspector (Retd.) Rajendra Singh who had investigated the matter and submitted charge sheet against all the accused-respondents and P. W. 7 Dr. Raghunandan Das Jindal who had conducted the postmortem on the dead body of the deceased-Afsana and proved the same as Ext. Ka12 were produced as formal witnesses.
The defence also examined Intezar and Head Constable 96 Rakesh Singh as D. W. 1 and D. W. 2.
The accused-respondents in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case as
false and submitted that since the deceased was having an affair with the accused-respondent no. 4, Mohsin, they had been falsely implicated in the so-called murder of the deceased-Afsana who had died infact a natural death in her house.
The trial Judge after a meticulous marshalling of the facts of the case and a threadbare scrutiny of the evidence on record, both oral as well as documentary came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove that the death of Afsana was unnatural. He further held that the prosecution failed to prove its charge against the accusedrespondents beyond all reasonable doubts.
Having perused the impugned judgement and order, we are of the view that the finding of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Judge is based upon cogent evidence and supported by relevant considerations and hence requires no interference by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. has failed to demonstrate that the finding recorded by the learned Trial Judge in the impugned judgement and order suffer from any illegality or legal infirmity requiring any interference by this Court.
The leave to appeal is accordingly refused.
Order Date :- 22.5.2018 SA
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the finding of acquittal by the trial Judge requires interference by this Court.
Whether the prosecution successfully proved that the death of the deceased was unnatural.
Whether the leave to appeal against the acquittal should be granted.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State Of U.P.
Liyakat
And 3 Others
Bala Krishna Narayana
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
