Merely Because Some Of The Witnesses Are Interested Or Inimical Witnesses, Their Evidence Cannot Be Totally Discarded: Supreme Court Of India

November 14, 2023by Primelegal Team0

Title:  Madan v State of Uttar Pradesh

Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 1790 Of 2017

Coram: Justice B.R. Gavai

 Decided On: November 09, 2023.

Introduction:

These appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 22nd February 2017, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Capital Case Nos. 3359 and 3520 of 2015 with Reference No. 9 of 2015 and Criminal Appeal No. 3519 of 2015, thereby dismissing the appeals filed by appellant Madan and another accused Ishwar; whereas, it allowed in part, the appeal filed by appellant Sudesh Pal. By the said judgment, the High Court confirmed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st July 2015 passed by the trial court in Sessions Case No. 09/2005 with Sessions Case No. 838 of 2005 and 10/2005, in respect of appellant – Madan, while commuting the sentence of capital punishment to life imprisonment in respect of appellant – Sudesh Pal.

Facts:

The incident took place at 5.30 PM and the FIR came to be registered on the same day at 7.40 PM. According to the FIR, Smt. Vimla Devi, who was the mother of Ram Kishan, cousin of Lokendra (PW-1), was a candidate in the election for Gram Pradhan; whereas the wife of one Arshad was the opposing candidate. On the one hand, Lokendra (PW-1) supported the candidature of Vimla Devi; whereas, the family of appellant Madan and Ram Bhajan supported the candidature of the wife of Arshad. When Vimla Devi came to be elected as Gram Pradhan along with Lokendra (PW-1), who also came to be elected as a member of the Gram Panchayat, appellant Madan and his family members bore a grudge with Lokendra (PW-1) and others on account of the feeling of jealousy.

The FIR states that on 14th October 2003, at about 5.30 PM, when Satendra, the real brother of Lokendra, his nephew Sunil, cousin Ram Kishan s, Sukhpal Singh and his father Jai Singh were going to the house. and had reached the house of Rashid s/o Mustafa, appellant Madan along with Rajveer, Ram Bhajan, Ramveer, and Kanwar Pal who were the sons of Ishwar along with Ishwar himself, who was the brother-in-law (sala) of appellant Madan, also known as Pahalwan, appellant Sudesh Pal, who was the real brother-in-law (sadu) of appellant Madan along with Neetu, who was the nephew of appellant Madan, armed with licensed guns, rifles and country-made pistols came from behind and started firing indiscriminately. As a result of the said firing, Satendra and Sunil fell down on ‘Khadanja’.

Rizwan, Rihan and Masooq Ali succumbed to their injuries and died on the way and their bodies were accordingly kept in their houses. Lokendram1) also reached the place of the incident and witnessed the incident with his own eyes and requested to register the report and take legal action.

Court’s Judgement and Analysis:

It can thus be seen that merely because some of the witnesses are interested or inimical witnesses, their evidence cannot be totally discarded. The only requirement is that their evidence has to be scrutinized with greater care and circumspection. In the present case, both the High Court and the trial court have meticulously scrutinized the evidence and found the testimony of the eye witnesses trustworthy and reliable. Court found that merely because there are certain inconsistencies in the evidence of the witnesses, their evidence cannot be discarded.

Court found that the present case is not a case wherein it can be held that imposition of death penalty is the only alternative. The evidence of witnesses would show that the role attributed is that all the accused persons including both the appellants herein had fired shots and indiscriminately indulged in the said firing.

The trial court imposed capital sentence on appellants Madan and Sudesh Pal. However, insofar as accused Ishwar is concerned, though the evidence against him is on similar lines, he was sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court, on the basis of the same evidence, though confirmed the death penalty insofar as appellant Madan is concerned, partly allowed the appeal of Sudesh Pal and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

Primelegal Team

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *