Partly allowed

Vijay Singh v. State

Patna HC6 Aug 2014CR. APP (DB)/539/1988

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a dacoity case involving the killing of a bank guard, the High Court examined evidence regarding identification and recovery of stolen money. The court upheld convictions under Sections 396 and 412 IPC for appellants Vinod Singh and Vijay Singh based on reliable identification, while acquitting the other four appellants where evidence of recovery was found weak and unsubstantiated.

What did the court decide?

Convictions under Section 412 IPC of Vinod Singh and Vijay Singh upheld; charges under Section 396 IPC dismissed for them. All other appellants acquitted on merits.

Vijay Singh Vs State — Patna HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Appeal (DB) No.446 of 1988

¶3

¶4

[Appeal against the Judgment and order of conviction dated 12.8.1988 passed by the 4^th Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya, in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 1985/4 of 1985]

¶5

¶6

====================================================== Kanti Devi, wife of Brijendra Singh, resident of village Mahaddi Nagar, Police Station Dhanarua, Distt. Patna.

¶7

.... .... Appellant/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar

¶10

.... .... Respondent/s

¶11

With

¶12

====================================================== Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 496 of 1988

¶13

======================================================

¶14

Khalil Mian, son of Ajij Mian, resident of village Musepur Bhewar, P.S Jehanabad, Distt. Jehanabad.

¶15

Ramta Singh, son of Harakh Singh 3. Harakh Singh, son of late Manne Singh

¶16

Both residents of village Chandi, P.S. Chandi, Distt. Bhojpur.

¶17

.... .... Appellant/s

¶18

Versus

¶19

The State of Bihar

¶20

.... .... Respondent/s

¶21

With

¶22

====================================================== Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 518 of 1988

¶23

======================================================

¶24

Vinod Singh, son of late Bulli Singh, resident of village Mushepur Bhewar, P.S. Jehanabad, Distt. Jehanabad

¶25

.... .... Appellant/s

¶26

Versus

¶27

The State of Bihar

¶28

.... .... Respondent/s

¶29

With

¶30

====================================================== Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 539 of 1988

¶31

======================================================

¶32

Vijay Singh, son of Rama Singh, resident of village Musarhi, P.S. Karai

¶33

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶34

2/25

¶35

Pursarai, Distt. Nalanda

¶36

.... .... Appellant/s

¶37

Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CR. APP (DB) No. 446 of 1988) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ashwani Kr. Sinha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. (In CR. APP (DB) No. 496 of 1988) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv. with For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Adv. (In CR. APP (DB) No. 518 of 1988) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Adv. Mr. Surendra Pd. Singh Mr. Anil Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. (In CR. APP (DB) No. 539 of 1988) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan Pd. Mr. Sanjay Kr. Sinha Mr. Satya Nr. Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, A.P.P.

¶38

======================================================

¶39

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DHARNIDHAR JHA &

¶40

HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH) Date: 06-08-2014

¶41

Seven appeals were filed against the judgment

¶42

dated 12^th August, 1988 passed by the 4^th Additional Sessions

¶43

Judge, Gaya, in Sessions Trial No.10 of 1985/04 of 1985.

¶44

Out of the aforesaid cases, Cr. Appeal No.436 of 1988, Cr. Appeal No.448 of 1988 and Cr. Appeal No.534 of

¶45

1988 have abated on account of death of four appellants,

¶46

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶47

3/25

¶48

namely, 1. Amna Khatoon, 2.Hiramani Devi, 3. Baiju Lal Singh

¶49

and 4. Ram Niwas Singh.

¶50

The remaining appeals are Cr. Appeal No.446 of 1988 filed by Kanti Devi, who has been sentenced to under rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section(s) 412 Indian Penal Code, Cr. Appeal No. 496 of 1988 has been filed on behalf of Khalil Mian, Ramta Singh and Harakh Singh, who

¶51

have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section(s) 412 Indian Penal Code, Cr. Appeal No.518 of 1988 and Cr. Appeal No.539 of 1988 preferred on behalf of Binod Singh and Vijay Singh, both of them have been convicted under Section(s) 396 and 412 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and seven years respectively. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

¶52

The case of the prosecution, according to the Informant Surendra Kumar Dwivedi, Clerk-cum-Cashier, Laxmi Commercial Bank, is that on 04.01.1983 at about 6.30 AM, he had left his bank office in the company of the Bank armed guard deceased Kishori Lal along with 12 lacs in a sealed box for deposit in Patna Branch situated at Exhibition Road. They were traveling in Patna-Gaya train. At about 8.00,

¶53

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶54

4/25

¶55

in the morning when the train just left Jehanabad Railway Station, 5-6 persons suddenly appeared and three of them tried to snatch away the gun of the armed guard. This led to struggle in which course one of them shot dead the armed guard. The miscreants then fled away with the cash box and the gun. He was also injured in this transaction for which he was removed to hospital where he recorded his fard-e-beyan. He claimed in the fard-e-beyan that he would be in a position to identify the miscreants if they were shown to him.

¶56

During investigation, on the basis of certain leads, the present Appellants/deceased Appellants and some acquitted persons were rounded up and the trial proceeded against as many as 28 persons out of whom the rest were acquitted, whereas, the present Appellants were convicted as mentioned above.

¶57

During trial, the prosecution examined as many as 43 witnesses. However, numbering of the witnesses was slightly wrong which it has led to confusion in the judgment of the Court below. We shall deal with the correct serial by name of the witnesses without bothering to correct the numbers given in the deposition.

¶58

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶59

5/25

¶60

Out of 43 witnesses, we find that PW 3 Samiullah Khan, PW5 M. Q. Hassan, PW 7 Ramjee Ram, PW 10 Akhtar Khan, PW 12 Mukesh Pd. Srivastava, PW 16 Sahdeo Yadav, PW 22 Ram Janam Nirala, PW 25 Brajmohan Pd. Verma, PW 31 Vijay Shankar Prasad, PW 42 Birendra Singh and PW 43 Paldeo Singh are tendered witnesses.

¶61

PW 1 Sheo Bachan Singh, PW 2 Prem Chand Ojha are formal witnesses merely on the point of occurrence having heard about the same. Similarly, PW 6 Rai Randhir Kumar Sinha and PW 13 Birendra Singh are on hearsay account. PW 4 Kapildeo Narain, PW 8 Awadh Kishore Pandey, PW 11 R. N. Kuer, PW 14 Havaldar Awadh Kr. Singh, PW 17 Mokhtar Hussain, PW 28 Ram Naresh Singh, PW 29 Kishori Singh, PW 30 Ram Lal Paswan and PW 33 Rajbali Yadav are formal witness. The rest of the witnesses we shall discuss in short narrating the part of the evidence which has led to the final result.

¶62

PW 18, Surendra Kumar Dwivedi, the Informant is the most important witnesses. In court, he narrated the manner in which the armed guard had been shot dead and the cash box containing 12,00,000/- was looted. He stated in Court that he had visited the jail premises twice for

¶63

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶64

6/25

¶65

participating in Test Identification Parade in which he had identified Appellant Vijay Singh, Vinod Singh and Ram Niwas Singh,(now dead). He proved the Test Identification Parade Chart as Ext.1. His evidence has been assailed on the ground that in cross-examination he stated that he could not properly see the person, who had shot the deceased. Further attack was on his admission that he had seen an Album during investigation but he had not identified any one from it.

¶66

PW 19 Triloki Nath was a witness to the seizure of certain articles from the house of Harak Singh. He has stated that he was called by the police to the house of Harak Singh where he saw bundles of currency notes, one steel box, few towels and National Savings Certificates. The currency notes were of different denominations such as 100, 50, 10 and 5. He claimed to have signed at the seizure list which was marked as Ext.11/2. It is important to note here that Harak Singh is the father of Appellant Kamta Singh.

¶67

The next witness Mahendra Pratap Singh, PW-20, stated that on the date of recovery at about 8.00 A.M., he was summoned by the Police and shown certain articles upon which he was asked to sign. Of the said articles, were bundles of currency notes, some National Saving Certificates.

¶68

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶69

7/25

¶70

He proves his signatures as marked Ext. 11/5, 11/6 and 11/7.

¶71

PW-21 Basudeo Singh stated that on 22.1.1983 he was the Investigating Officer at Chandi Police Station, Distt. Bhojpur. On the said date, G.R.P. Case 1 of 1983 was being investigated into by A.S.I Rajendra Sah and Lakhan Mehra. In course of the same, they contacted him and searched the premises of Harakh Singh in which he resided along with his sons. Two independent witnesses namely, Mahendra Pratap Singh (PW-20) formal and Triloki Nath Singh (PW-19) were summoned. The house was searched in the presence of the witnesses and a number of articles were recovered of which a seizure list was prepared. He along with Rajendra Sah and Lakhan Mehra signed on the seizure as also Harakh Singh, Appellant. He and his son were arrested. In the course of search, a locked Steel Box was recovered which was opened in the presence of the witnesses. When Harakh Singh refused to give the key, the Box was broke it opened and the box was found containing Towel, wad of notes of Rs. 20, 10 and 5 as also Rs. 1. Some National Saving Certificates and gold pieces were recovered along with some certificates. Some of the articles were produced in Court as material exhibits. However, they faulted in identification of Harakh Singh and his son in

¶72

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶73

8/25

¶74

Court. He stated that the Box was kept concealed in a fodder

¶75

room under the basket and that PW-19 and PW 20 had broken open the box. The bundles of notes had markings of torn pieces of treasury stamp, which was noted in the seizure list.

¶76

The next important witness PW-23, Lakhan Mehra, was the part Investigating Officer and was the Sub Inspector of Jehanabad on 4.1.1983. On the said date, he learnt that the occurrence had taken place and Kishori Lal had been shot dead and the money had been looted of which he made a Sanha diary entry and proceeded towards the place of occurrence. However, he could not find any lead on the miscreants. On 21.1.1983, he along with Rajendra Rai, Officer Incharge (PW-26) went to Chandi Police Station and with the assistance of the local police, raided the house of Appellant Harakh Singh in the morning. He testifies the preparation of seizure list Ext. 10/1. He stated that it was in his presence that many bank slips, National Saving Certificates, Cash Memo and Gold pieces had been recovered and seized, on 6.2.1983. He prepared the seizure list of the sealed box opened in the presence of witnesses Sajjan Singh and Narain Sharma. He further clarified the formal investigation and proved the fard-ebeyan and First Information Report, Exts. 13 and 14

¶77

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶78

9/25

¶79

respectively. In cross-examination, he stated that the Box had

¶80

been found in an open field.

¶81

PW-26 Rajendra Rai is the next Investigating Officer who stated that on 4.1.1983, he was the Officer Incharge of Rail Police Station Jehanabad, on which date he heard about the occurrence and lodged Sanha entries of the same. He then proceeded on the route of the train and

¶82

boarded the same. He made enquiries from the Guard who confirmed about the occurrence and that the hose pipe of the train has been cut. He confirms the factum of the occurrence. He prepared the inquest report and injury report etc. He further stated that on 6.1.1983 at about 7.30 P.M., on the requisition to make efforts to arrest the suspect namely, Lalan Tiwari, he on 7.9.1983, raided his house but neither was he arrested nor any incriminating material recovered from his house. He subsequently made some raids on various suspects and recovered some incriminating materials, but, none of them are related to the present case. On 21.1.983 at about 12.00 noon, he received secret information that miscreants were hidden in village Chandipur with looted articles on which a Sanha was recorded and enquires were made about the veracity of the information. He then along with others raided the house of

¶83

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶84

10/25

¶85

Harakh Singh and in the presence of independent witnesses, Mahendra Pratap Singh (PW-20) and Trilokinath (PW-19), searched his house, and found a locked Steel Box which showed signs of force upon it. When the key was not handed over to them, they broke it open and found incriminating articles of which a seizure list was prepared which is marked Ext. 10/1. He explains the relationship of the Appellants by saying that Harakh Singh is the father-in-law of Vinod Singh and Ramta Singh was his brother-in-law. Ramta Singh and Harakh Singh were arrested there and then. On 17.1.1983 and 18.1.1983, he found out about issuance of the National Saving Certificates in favour of Ramta Singh and Kalawati Devi, wife of Vinod Singh, from the relevant post office. He identifies Harakh Singh who was present in Court. Even though he identified the currencies produced in Court but, he said that there was no special marking on the same nor was the name of the Bank clearly visible on the same. He stated that he did not see the currencies but merely wrapped them in a newspaper and bound them. He also admitted that he did not make a note of various Serial Numbers since it was not possible to do so. He, however, gives details of the currencies by examining them in Court. It also appears that the National Saving Certificates were

¶86

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶87

11/25

¶88

not produced in Court.

¶89

PW-27 Brajkishore Gope is also a part Investigating Officer and inasmuch as stated that on 27.1.1983, on a requisition, he raided the house of Ramta Singh but could not arrest him. He clarifies that Vinod Singh had confessed before the Investigating Officer Rajdeo Singh and, therefore, the raid had been conducted on the basis of the same. From the house of Raju Singh, a Transistor, some articles of clothing and money of no consequences was recovered. He also arrested Baiju Singh. He stated that money of very little value was recovered from his house but all the raids had been conducted on the basis of statement of Vinod Singh.

¶90

PW-32 Rajdeo Singh is the next Investigating Officer who stated that on information, he after institution of the First Information Report, examined several witnesses. He had deputed Sub Inspector Lakhan Mehra and R.P. Ram to conduct raids in the house of Harakh Singh, fatherin-law of Vinod Singh. He also arrested Vinod Singh who confessed his guilt before him and recovered articles on the basis of the same. From 1 foot under the ground, a box was seized. It contained an HMT watch of which he prepared a seizure list. He explains the articles by stating the numerical but

¶91

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶92

12/25

¶93

not as to what exactly was recovered apart from the watch. He identifies the watch in the Court. He further stated that on 23.1.1983 he raided the house of Khalil Mian and recovered another watch and some jewellery items. The seizure list was prepared in the presence of Kaushal Kishore (not examined) and Mukhtar Hussain, PW-17. His mother Amna Khatoon was arrested and she was given a copy of the same. The seizure list

¶94

was marked Ext.10/3.

¶95

On 20.3.1983, the house of Bijendra Singh was searched and a number of currency notes were recovered from his house. Each bunch of notes was stapled with the seal and rubber band on it. The incriminating article was recovered from an earthen pot which was handed over by the wife of Vinod Singh, namely, Kanti Devi. The seizure list was marked Ext. 10/4.

¶96

On 24.1.1983 at about 6.30 A.M. the house of Bijay Singh was searched from where a sum of Rs.1,000/- was recovered. The seizure list is marked as Ext. 10/5.

¶97

Some other accused who were acquitted by the Court below was also arrested in this transaction.

¶98

He allegedly got the articles put on Test Identification Parade. He identifies the wad of notes which

¶99

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶100

13/25

¶101

already marked Exts. 8 and 8/18 all of which were marked Ext.

¶102

18 now.

¶103

From the house of Vinod Singh, huge amount of money was recovered from a Box which was marked Ext. 18/1. The currencies recovered from the house of Bijay Singh was entered in a seizure list Ext. 10/5, the signature of which he proves as Ext. 18/2 and his signature on the seizure list of the recoveries from the house of Khalil Mian is 18/3. He also identifies the material exhibits produced in Court. He concedes that there is no document from which it can be inferred that the currencies which were recovered from the house of various accused, were the ones which were being sent for deposit. He further concedes that he had not learnt the Serial numbers of currencies which was sent to the Circle Office from which alone, it could be known that the currencies recovered, were the ones, which had been looted away. He also stated that he did not think it essential to put the currencies on Test Identification Parade. It was suggested to him that he had pasted the slips on the currencies to which he denied.

¶104

He had also included the witnesses present in the same boggy, in the Test Identification Parade. He stated that before the house of Vinod Singh was searched and seized,

¶105

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶106

14/25

¶107

searches had already been conducted in village Chandipur. He also stated that Bijay Singh had attempted to flee who had surrendered on warning.

¶108

His further statement was that Vinod Singh had been forwarded before the Magistrate on 25.1.1983 and not earlier because he had to be taken to various places for conducting the raid. He further clarified that Vinod Singh was forwarded to the Magistrate on 24.1.1983 and was taken on Police remand on 25.1.1983. He had been kept at the Police Station for purposes of investigation. He specifically denied that there was no opportunity of being him seen by any one in Police custody.

¶109

He further stated that the currencies which had been recovered from the house of Vinod Singh and Kanti Devi did not contain any slips of the Bank nor he did take immediate step for getting them put in Test Identification Parade.

¶110

He stated that Mukhtar Hussain and Kaushal Kishore were the two witnesses whom he had carried with him for recovery of the articles. He further stated that Vinod Singh was arrested on 24.1.1983 and produced on the very same day but since the Court was closed, he was brought back to the Police Station and produced once again on 25.1.1983. He was

¶111

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶112

15/25

¶113

also kept under the Police remand for five days in which he was

¶114

kept at GRP Police Station but denied the suggestion that he was shown to the witnesses. He stated that he had gone to search the house of Bijendra Singh on 23.1.1983 on the statement of Vinod Singh where only his wife Kanti Devi was present who had taken out the articles and given it to them. He stated once again that the currencies were not put on Test Identification Parade.

¶115

PW-33 Rajbali Yadav has testified that the National Saving Certificate which had been seized in the present case numbering 623209 to 623216 had been destroyed in the floods. He has stated that Rajendra Singh was Officer-inCharge in G.R.P. Police Station, Jehanabad, in the year 1985 and a letter had been sent for issuing duplicate certificates which letter he proves as Ext. 20.

¶116

PW-34 Ram Narayan Prasad was the Driver of a Jeep. He had ferried three persons to Patna from Kulharia Station. Out of the three persons, one of them got off at Phulwari, the second one at Patna and the 3^rd one took a drive around Patna and was brought back to Koilwar. He stated that he was summoned to the Jail for attending the Test Identification Parade where he identified the three miscreants

¶117

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶118

16/25

¶119

but he did not do so in Court on account of which he was declared hostile on the point of identification.

¶120

PW-35 Nawal Kishore Choudhary has stated that he had also been summoned to attend the Test Identification Parade and had identified the person who had returned to Koilwar but did not identify him in Court. In crossexamination, he stated that he had identified the said person on account of the coercion of the Police Authority.

¶121

PW-36 Kashi Nath Tiwari was the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, who had got conducted the Test Identification Parade of Vinod Singh and Vijay Singh. According to him, Ram Narayan Prasad, PW-34 declared hostile and Nand Kishore Choudhary, PW-35, who has not supported the prosecution on the point of identification, voluntarily did so. He proved the Test Identification Parade (Ext. 21).

¶122

The next witness PW-37 Dhruvdev Pandey was the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, at Jehanabad and had conducted the Test Identification Parade of Vinod kumar Singh and Bijay Singh where Satyender Kumar Dwivedi, PW-18, had identified the two with specific overt act. He proves his signature in the Test Identification Chart as Ext. 21/1. He has

¶123

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶124

17/25

¶125

been cross-examined with regard to the mark of identification of the two accused persons.

¶126

PW-38 Suryavansh Prasad was the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class and had recorded the statement of accused Ramta Singh. He identifies it as Ext. 22. In cross-examination, he stated that he had recorded the statement of Ramta Singh on the day he was produced before him and was handed over to the Police after recording the statement.

¶127

PW-39 Anthoni Hansda was the Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, and had got conducted the Test Identification Parade of Vinod Singh and Vijay Singh by witnesses Munna Yadav, Akhilesh Kumar, Dev Vansh Singh and Akil Ahmad, but, none of them have been examined and, hence, his evidence is of no value.

¶128

PW-40 Chandrika Prasad was the Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, who stated that on 6.8.1993 on the orders of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, he had got conducted a Test Identification Parade of the accused. He proves a chart as Ext.21/3. However, he does not specify which of the accused were put on Test Identification Parade but merely states that the Informant was a witness of the Test Identification Parade.

¶129

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶130

18/25

¶131

PW-41 Dev Vansh Singh is merely on the point of occurrence and irrelevant for the purpose of this case, so far as the present Appellants are concerned.

¶132

PW-42, Birendra Singh, proves the handwriting of Circle Officer of Jehanabad, Ajay Narain on the Test Identification Parade (Ext. 21/4.

¶133

PW 43, Paldeo Singh has proved the

¶134

signature of one Motilal as Ext. 23.

¶135

On an analysis of the evidence adduced on behalf of the Prosecution, we find that following materials appearing against the Appellants:

¶136

i) That the Appellant Kanti Devi is the wife of absconding accused Bijendra Singh and Harakh Singh is the father of Vinod Singh whereas Appellant Ramta Singh is the brother-in-law of Vinod Singh.

¶137

ii) As against the Appellant Ramta Singh , we

¶138

find that there are two circumstances against him;

¶139

a) His confession recorded under Section 164

¶140

Cr. P.C. (Ext. 22)

¶141

b) Recovery of articles (Ext. 21/4) which were also put on Test Identification Parade.

¶142

iii) As against Appellant Vinod Singh , we find

¶143

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶144

19/25

¶145

that the following evidence appearing against him:-

¶146

a) Identification by Surendra Kumar Dwivedi,

¶147

PW-18, in the Test Identification Parade conducted by PW-37 Dhuruvdev Pandey.

¶148

b) A watch, Rs.274/- and new clothes were recovered from his possession marked as Material Exts. (ix).

¶149

iv) As against the Appellant Vijay Singh , we find the following circumstances are against him:-

¶150

a) Identification in the Test Identification Parade by PW-18 Surendra Kumar Dwivedi coducted by PW-37 Dhuruvdev Pandey, Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Jehanabad.

¶151

b) Recovery of Rs.780/- on his own production.

¶152

v) As against the Appellant Kanti Devi, wife of

¶153

Bijendra Singh, it appears that a sum of Rs.4,08,000/- was recovered vide Ext list 10/4 which was allegedly transferred in her name by her husband.

¶154

vi) As against Appellant Khalil Mian, the

¶155

following circumstances appear against him:

¶156

a) Some articles of jewellery were recovered from his possessions which have no bearing

¶157

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶158

20/25

¶159

to the present case.

¶160

On closely reading the evidence of PW-38 Suryavansh Prasad, Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, who recorded the confession of Ramta Singh under Section 164 Cr. P.C. we find that he recorded the statement of Ramta Singh on the day he was produced before him and after recording the same, he was handed over to the Police. Evidently, the Magistrate did not take care to elicit information with regard to the voluntariness of the confession so recorded nor did he assure him that he would not be handed over to the Police after the statement and thus, it has to be discredited on the basis of established principles of law.

¶161

The arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellants were that the Test Identification Parade conducted by PW-37 Dhuruvdev Pandey should be rejected in view of the fact that in paragraphs-4 and 5, it has been stated by him that a mark of identification had been put on the two accused, Vinod Kumar Singh and Vijay Singh. His further submission is that it is a case of single identification and, hence, Vinod Singh and Vijay Singh should be given benefit of doubt. The Test Identification Parade has also been assailed on the ground that it was sought to be conducted on three dates, the accused had

¶162

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶163

21/25

¶164

been kept on Police remand as also an album of accused persons had been shown to the witnesses. Moreover, the Court has rejected the evidence of PWs. 34 and 35 since they had failed to identify the accused in the Dock. Counsel for the Appellants submits that the fact that Test Identification Parade was mere a formality and, in fact, he had been shown the faces of the miscreants from Album on the basis of which he had identified them subsequently.

¶165

As for recovery, the counsel submits that no independent witness has supported the same nor was the exact amount looted disclosed by the Prosecution. There being no special markings on the articles recovered, it could not be said that the articles recovered were the ones which had been looted away. Further, no Identification Parade of the articles had been conducted which renders the recoveries fictitious and unreliable.

¶166

As for recoveries of other articles from the house of Harakh Singh, the watch recovered from the house of Vinod Singh and Khalil Mian along with some jewellery items have no relevance to the present case and, hence, they also have to be rejected.

¶167

From the evidence of the Investigating

¶168

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶169

22/25

¶170

Officer, it appears that money recovered from the house of

¶171

Appellants Vinod Singh and Kanti Devi did not contain any special marking of the Bank and, hence, it is difficult to conclude with certainty that the said money was part of the transaction of the present dacoity. Hence the charge under Section 412 Indian Penal Code has to necessarily fail.

¶172

We find that the PW-18 and PW 37 with

¶173

regard to the identification of the Appellants Vijay Singh and Vinod Singh is the sole material upon which their conviction is based. So we will have to examine it minutely by going through the evidence of the relevant witnesses i.e. PW-18 and PW-37.

¶174

The first question which arises with regard to an identifying witness is his competency. On going through evidence of PW 18, the Informant, we find that admittedly, he was an eye witness who described the manner of occurrence and was a witness to the entire sequence of events. Hence, he has to be accepted as a competent witness. Further, he supported the fact in Court that he had attended the Test Identification Parade and had identified Appellants Vijay Singh and Vinod Singh as also Ram Niwas Singh (dead). He further identifies them in Court. In his evidence, he has clarified that he had not identified two accused on the basis of any special

¶175

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶176

23/25

¶177

identification mark. Thus, his evidence is unassailable on the

¶178

point of identification, both at the Test Identification Parade as well as in Court.

¶179

Now to turn to the next question on whether there was delay in holding the Test Identification Parade which would result in the possibility of a wrong identification on account of fading memory. The supporting evidence of PW-37

¶180

in this regard is that he was the Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, and on 3.2.1983 i.e. around a month of the occurrence, he had got conducted a Test Identification Parade in the Jehanabad Jail of Appellants Vinod Kumar Singh and Vijay Singh. He supports the fact that PW-18 had identified both of them therein and he proves his signature on the Test Identification Parade Chart (Ext. 21/1). He no doubt states that he had marked the two accused with pen on their palms but it is a well known procedure that it is done for the convenience of the person who conducts the Test Identification Parade and is not visible to the identifying witnesses. The purpose of putting such a mark is only to be sure as to who indeed has been identified. It is done, in other words to allay any confusion and undue hassle . In such circumstances, in our opinion, the identification of the two Appellants does not suffer from any patent infirmity so as to

¶181

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶182

24/25

¶183

render it unreliable.

¶184

Moreover, the principle of giving benefit of

¶185

doubt on sole identification cannot be applied in a clichéd manner. There cannot be an automatic acquittal on account of it. The reliability of such identification will always depend on the facts of the particular case. In the present case as dealt with above there is no reason to disbelieve it.

¶186

In such circumstances, we uphold the conviction and sentence of the Appellants Vinod Singh and Vijay Singh under Section 396 Indian Penal Code, acquit them of charges under Section 412 Indian Penal Code and affirm the Judgment and order dated 12.8.1988 passed by the 4^th Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya, in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 1985/4 of 1985. Their bail bonds are hereby cancelled. They are directed to surrender in the Court below to serve out the remaining period of sentence.

¶187

As for the Appellants Kanti Devi, Khalil Mian, Ramta Singh and Harakh Singh as discussed above, the evidence connecting them to the present occurrence on the basis of recoveries, is of a weak nature, and hence, giving them benefit of doubt, they are acquitted of the charges.

¶188

Accordingly, Cr. Appeals (DB) No. 446 of

¶189

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.446 of 1988 dt.06-08-2014

¶190

25/25

¶191

1988 and 496 of 1988 are allowed and Cr. Appeals (DB) 518 of 1988 and 539 of 1988 are dismissed with modifications

¶192

mentioned above. NAFR/ S.Ali U T

¶193

(Dharnidhar Jha, J)

¶194

(Anjana Prakash, J)

Vijay Singh v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Singh v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Poulush Hembram @ Prithviraj Hembram Vs The State Of Bihar

Niraj Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Sakal Yadav @ Sakaldeo Yadav and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Binod Singh Vs State

Khalil Mian and Anr. Vs State

Jairam Prasad Vs State of Bihar and Ors.