Allowed

Amin Quireshi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC19 Dec 2023CR. APP (DB)/275/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal, setting aside the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC. Finding significant discrepancies in eyewitness accounts and a lack of motive or reliable evidence, the court applied the benefit of doubt and acquitted the appellant who was subsequently ordered for release.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed, conviction and sentence set aside, appellant acquitted and directed to be released forthwith from jail.

Amin Quireshi Vs The State Of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.275 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2007 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

Amin Quireshi, Son of Sallahuddin Quirashi, Resident of Village + P.O. - Makhdumpur, District Jehanabad.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

	Versus
The State of Bihar	... ... Respondent/s
===================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s :	================================= Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr. Ram Hriday Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ritwaj Raman, Advocate Mrs. Maruti Kumari, Advocate
For the Respondent/s :	Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, APP
For the Informant :	Mr. Bhaskar Shandilya, Advocate Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
	Mr. Sanjeeb Kumar Sanju, Advocate Mr. Upendra Mishra, Advocate
===================== CORAM: HONOURABLE and HONOURABLE ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR.	================================= MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)

¶7

Date : 19-12-2023

¶8

The sole appellant has been convicted

¶9

under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code vide

¶10

judgment dated 28.01.2017, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jehanabad in Sessions

¶11

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 2/17

¶12

Trial No. 208 of 2008 / 101 of 2012, arising out of Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 246 of 2007. By order dated 31.01.2017, he has been directed to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he has to further suffer imprisonment for one month.

¶13

He is alleged to have hacked a differently

¶14

abled woman to death in her house on 25.09.2007 in front of her mother.

¶15

We have heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur,

¶16

the learned Advocate for the appellant; Mr. Bhaskar Shandilya, learned Advocate for the informant and Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, the learned APP for the State.

¶17

The FIR has been lodged by the brother of the deceased (P.W. 7) who has alleged that he had lef for Patna on 25.09.2007 by a 12:30 train. However, in the night, he was informed by one Minhaj Ansari (not examined) that his sister has been killed. He

¶18

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 3/17

¶19

immediately lef for Patna and when he came back home, his mother/Jamila Khatoon (P.W. 9) told him that on the previous night, a person, clad in vest and lungi and of a thin frame had killed the deceased. She

¶20

had tried to accost him as well, but the accused never

¶21

responded.

¶22

suspected that perhaps the assailant would be from the family of those persons with whom he is on litigating terms and has been contesting a Title Suit (T.S. No. 53 of 2004). In the aforesaid Title Suit, the opposite parties had not been appearing and the informant had

¶23

to get a paper publication of the notice to them.

¶24

One Bineshwar Chaudhary, who is the son of one of the opposite parties in the Title Suit had though appeared in but had stated P.W. 7 would not be able to avail its fruit in the litigation. The informant

¶25

had litigation with other families also because of his

¶26

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 4/17

¶27

family having landed property. It was therefore suspected by P.W. 7 that somebody with whom he is on litigating terms has committed the offence.

¶28

On the basis of the aforenoted written report on 26.09.2007 i.e. on the next day of the occurrence, Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 246 of 2007, dated 26.09.2007 was registered for investigation for offence under Section 302 of the IPC. Bineshwar Chaudhary, referred to above, was named as the suspected accused.

¶29

8.However, it appears that charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant who is a butcher by profession and is a tenant in the house of P.W. 7.

¶30

At the Trial, P.W. 7 did not support the

¶31

prosecution version but has not been declared hostile. He has reiterated the story of his having lef for Patna in the afernoon of 25.09.2007 and his having been informed in the night that his sister had been killed. He

¶32

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 5/17

¶33

came back on the next day and lodged the written report, naming one Bineshwar Chaudhary as a suspected accused. However, in his examination-inchief, he has stated that when his mother (P.W. 9) became normal, she told him on the day when he had reached home that the appellant had killed the deceased.

¶34

In his cross-examination, even though

¶35

he has admitted that the appellant runs a meat shop from a rented room in his house but there was no dispute with him with respect to either the rental amount or his running the meat shop. In fact, he went to the extent of explaining to the Court that whenever his family required mutton, the appellant only supplied it and the cost of the mutton was adjusted against the monthly rental which the appellant had been paying.

¶36

The FIR was lodged only on the basis

¶37

of the threat doled out by the opposite parties in the

¶38

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 6/17

¶39

Title Suit.

¶40

At the time of occurrence, the mother of P.W. 7 was about 75 years of age who could read and write and did not also require glasses while reading newspapers. He has further repeated that when he had come back home in the night of 25.09.2007, his mother had spoken about the accused person to be of a lean frame who was dressed in a vest and lungi. Only three days later, did the mother take the name of the appellant as the person who had hacked the deceased to death. The suggestion that P.W. 7 wanted to have the rented room from where the appellant ran his shop vacated, was denied.

¶41

Thus, from his deposition only, it appears that the name of the appellant transpired only afer three days of the lodging of the FIR. It appears from the background facts that the appellant did not have any motive or reason to kill the deceased.

¶42

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 7/17

¶43

It has also come in evidence that the

¶44

deceased was a married lady who was physically challenged and the relationship between P.W. 7, the deceased and P.W. 9 was very cordial. The appellant had been running his shop in one of the rooms of house of P.W. 7 for the last six to seven years prior to the occurrence.

¶45

What then would have impelled the

¶46

appellant to kill the deceased?

¶47

If it were not for the insistence of the

¶48

family of the deceased to have the shop vacated, there was no conceivable flash-point between the appellant and the deceased. There is no evidence of any ransacking of the house or of any sexual attack either.

¶49

One, therefore, starts doubting

¶50

whether the mother of the deceased (P.W. 9) had made a correct statement while in her senses.

¶51

We do admit that there is nothing on

¶52

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 8/17

¶53

record to infer any caducity of P.W. 9 because of dotage and senescence.

¶54

This therefore has raised our curiosity

¶55

as to why P.W. 9 had named the appellant before P.W. 7 afer three days of the lodging of the FIR.

¶56

A bare look at the deposition of P.W. 9

¶57

would clear the doubts.

¶58

Jamila Khatoon, as we have seen, is

¶59

the mother of the deceased as also P.W. 9. In her examination-in-chief, she has named the appellant as having come to the house with a butcher’s knife. He sat near her. The deceased also was somewhere around. Thereafer, she has alleged that the deceased was slit through by the aforenoted knife. She was also threatened by the appellant of being killed if she raised any alarm. It was only in the next morning that she shouted that the appellant had killed the deceased. On her shouts, many persons of the neighbourhood had

¶60

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 9/17

¶61

arrived. She has further stated before the Trial Court that because of such mishap in her family which made her cry day in and day out, she lost her eye-sight. She was not even in a position to see the face of the lawyer

¶62

in the Court who was cross-examining her. She

¶63

admitted before the Trial Court that the same situation, health-wise, was prevalent with her threefour years ago i.e. when the occurrence had taken pace.

¶64

With respect to the motive of the

¶65

appellant for having committed crime, P.W. 9 had no clue. She has also asserted the fact that the appellant had been running a meat shop in one of the rooms of the family house for the last ten years and there was no dispute with him on any account. He afer committing the murder, ran away.

¶66

When her son (P.W. 7) came back

¶67

home, she had told him about the appellant having

¶68

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 10/17

¶69

killed the deceased. She had also spoken to the persons of the neighbourhood who had arrived in the morning of the occurring.

¶70

Obviously, therefore, she would have

¶71

stated about the appellant having killed the deceased, if she is to be believed.

¶72

From a perusal of the deposition of P.W. 9, therefore, we get an idea that either she was of too old age to make a coherent statement or she was just hallucinating about the appellant having killed the deceased.

¶73

We say so for the reason that if she had not become unconscious on seeing the grisly crime, she would have definitely told the name of the appellant to her son (P.W. 7) who came in the night of the occurrence only and to many others who had come in the next morning. None of the persons in the early part of the investigation ever referred to the appellant

¶74

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 11/17

¶75

as having been named by P.W. 9 before whom the murder had taken place.

¶76

Even otherwise, the entire narration of P.W. 9 does not appear to be correct for the reason that if the appellant had been seeing her tenant for the last ten years who had no dispute with the family, either with respect to the tenancy or on any other account, he would not have committed the murder for

¶77

no reason in front of P.W. 9.

¶78

P.W. 9, therefore, was making a

¶79

statement in some delirium or else she would have stated the reason for her not having named the appellant straightaway when her son (P.W. 7) had arrived in the night of the occurrence.

¶80

We are at a loss to understand as to how the police changed its course of investigation and turned its gaze only towards the appellant, without realizing that not only the killing was mindless but the

¶81

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 12/17

¶82

accusation was even more difficult to believe.

¶83

anyhow take the case to a logical conclusion gets reflected very poorly if one examines the deposition of Mustafa Ansari and Md. Akhatar (P.W. 1 and P.W. 2

¶84

respectively).

¶85

The aforenoted two persons are

¶86

residents of the same locality who have claimed that while they were coming from the Mosque, they saw the appellant with another person moving nervously. This observation of P.Ws. 1 and 2 makes no sense as nothing was done by them to know the reason.

¶87

If the appellant would have committed

¶88

the offence, the aforenoted witnesses would surely have known that the appellant was the culprit. They have not made any statement during the course of investigation and only for the first time before the Trial Court, they have come up with an absolutely weird

¶89

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 13/17

¶90

story of their having seen the appellant along with another person, dressed in a white vest and lungi moving with a feverish pitch. That someone else at the Trial had said that he had seen the appellant wearing white vest and white lungi. Well, that is the dress of persons of the community from which the appellant hails and deceased belonged!

¶91

The logic of the prosecution, thus, is

¶92

not only weird but absolutely skewed.

¶93

Similar statements have been made by

¶94

other witnesses.

¶95

Another blatant attempt of the

¶96

prosecution to have the prosecution case proved at the Trial is the citing of Reyaz Ahmad (P.W. 10) as one of the witnesses in this case. He is a local Doctor, who as touted by the prosecution, had treated the appellant for a wound in his finger. The inference, therefore, is that while committing the murder, the appellant had

¶97

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 14/17

¶98

hurt his finger.

¶99

P.W. 10 though admits that he

¶100

practices medicine and surgery in the village but did not remember if he had ever treated the appellant.

¶101

Rest all other witnesses are hearsay

¶102

and their knowledge is based only on what they had heard from P.W. 7 and P.W. 9.

¶103

That the deceased died a homicidal

¶104

death is beyond dispute.

¶105

Dr. Dinesh Kumar (P.W. 3) had

¶106

conducted the post-mortem examination. The postmortem report reflects that the deceased was brutally killed. There are four incised wounds on her body. According to the prosecution case, the deceased was cut to death by a butcher’s knife. Even P.W. 9, whom we must say, we have not believed, has not talked about the deceased having been attacked a number of times. This then reflects a totally different picture. The

¶107

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 15/17

¶108

deceased had been killed by a knife but beyond that,

¶109

all the witnesses appear to be playing the blind-man’s buff.

¶110

Our curiosity, even then, could not be

¶111

doused especially when the reason of implication of the

¶112

applicant at the hands of P.W. 7 and P.W. 9 remains unknown for there is no dissonance of the appellant with the family of the deceased.

¶113

To what benefit would the murder

¶114

have been committed?

¶115

The police never ventured into any

¶116

other theory of killing.

¶117

Were the family members involved in

¶118

the killing of the deceased for the deceased being a differently abled woman who perhaps had lost her relevance in the family?

¶119

But thinking on those lines would be

¶120

making forays into thin air. We have to leave all such

¶121

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 16/17

¶122

speculations at that only.

¶123

We have no option but to give benefit

¶124

of doubt to the appellant.

¶125

impugned judgment of conviction and order of

¶126

sentence passed by the learned Trial Court is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of charge levelled

¶127

against him.

¶128

The appeal stands allowed.

¶129

It has been informed by the learned

¶130

Advocate that the appellant is in jail. He is directed to

¶131

be released forthwith from jail, if not detained or

¶132

wanted in any other case.

¶133

dispatched to the Superintendent of the concerned Jail

¶134

forthwith for compliance and record.

¶135

The records of this case be returned to

¶136

the concerned Trial Court forthwith.

¶137

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.275 of 2017 dt.19-12-2023 17/17

¶138

Interlocutory application/s, if any, also

¶139

stand disposed off accordingly.

¶140

(Ashutosh Kumar, J)

¶141

(Nani Tagia, J)

¶142

Sauravkrsinha/ Sunil-

¶143

AFR/NAFR AFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 21.12.2023 Transmission Date 21.12.2023

Amin Quireshi v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amin Quireshi v. The State Of Bihar

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

Hemant Paswan and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Baby Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Faudi Yadav @ Fudi Vs The State Of Bihar

Khushboo Ara Vs The State of Bihar

Khusboo Ara Vs The State of Bihar

Ramvinay Rai @ Vinay Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar