The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal against the acquittal of accused persons charged with robbery and offences under the Arms Act, holding that the prosecution failed to prove identity or establish recovery of stolen properties.
Criminal Appeal dismissed; acquittal of accused affirmed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1087 OF 2004
JUDGMENT:
The appeal is filed against the acquittal of the accused in C.C.No.19 of 2000 on the file of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for Trial of Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Case-cum-Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, for the offence punishable under Section 394 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of Indian Arms Act.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on the intervening night of 20/21.06.1993 when RTC bus bearing No.AP-9Z-3767 was proceeding from Tirupathi to Vijayawada, at Vallore four persons got up from the bus and threatened the driver by showing Pistol and committed robbery on the passengers. On a complaint given by driver of the bus, Police registered a case in Crime No.78 of 1993 and investigated into. During the course of investigation, on 10.05.1995 the accused were apprehended and they were given confessional statements about the commission of offence and the stolen property was seized at the instance of A.1 to A.3. A.4 said to have been apprehended on 23.05.1995 along with others and he also gave confessional statement and consequently, fire arms were seized. The accused were charged for the offence punishable under Section 394 IPC and they pleaded not guilty. After considering the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 22, the Court below recorded order of acquittal. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present appeal is filed.
3. The point for consideration is whether the acquittal recorded by the Court below is legal and sustainable?
4. POINT:
As seen from the evidence on record, prosecution has produced M.Os.1 to 7. But the prosecution has not examined the witnesses from whom they were seized. These properties were said to have pledged by the accused persons and therefore, if the recovery is to be the basis of confession, then it should be shown that the accused has taken the stolen property and pledged the same with the third parties and at the instance of the accused the said properties were seized from those persons. Non-examination of those persons is fatal to the prosecution case and the Court below rightly observed in para No.27 of the judgment. Though arrest is said to have been made for A.4 along with others and weapons were seized, no panchanama was said to have drafted. As can be seen from the findings of the Court below in para No.24 of the judgment, the Court below has doubted the veracity of identity of accused persons by the witnesses. P.W.3 said to have identified A.1, A.2 and A.4 and P.W.4 also identified A.1 and A.2. P.W.5 said to have identified A.1 to A.3. Evidently, none of these witnesses have given the identity particulars of the accused and the identification was long after commission of the offence and the said identification has been rightly ignored by the Court below. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances neither identification of the accused nor the seizure of the property was established, the Court below rightly acquitted the accused and that order needs no interference by this Court.
5. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO
FEBRUARY 27, 2012 YVL
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1087 OF 2004
27.02.2012
YVL
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the acquittal recorded by the Court below is legal and sustainable given the lack of identification and seizure evidence?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State
Accused
N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
