The Supreme Court has upheld the conviction & life-term imprisonment of four in a murder case of a coolie while stating that findings of trial court leading to acquittal are perverse and erroneous, it is always open for appellate court to reverse such findings on reappreciation of evidence on record. (Rajendra @ Rajappa & Ors Vs State of Karnataka)
A two-judge bench headed by Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R. Subhash Reddy has pronounced its judgment on a appeal filed by the accused persons in a murder case of a coolie. The trial Court had acquitted them in the case but the High Court had revered the order of acquittal. All the accused were Chargesheeted by the Sessions court under sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 326, 307, 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code. But the accused were acquitted by the Sessions Court. On the appeal by the state of Karnataka, the High Court had reversed the order of acquittal and convicted the accused for offences under 143, 148, 149, 324, 326, & 302 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced to life-imprisonment.
Rejecting the arguments by the counsel for the accused that unless there are substantial and compelling reasons, judgement of the acquittal cannot be overturned, the Apex Court has held there cannot be any straight-jacket formula to apply readily for the cases in appeals arising out of acquittal recorded by the trial court.
Further, the Top Court has said, whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view or not; whether the findings recorded by the trial court are in conformity with the evidence or not; are the matters which depend upon facts and circumstances of each case and evidence on record.
By reappreciating evidence on record if appellate court comes to conclusion that findings recorded by the trial court are erroneous and contrary to law, it is always open for the appellate Court, by recording good and compelling reasons for interference and overturns the judgment of acquittal by converting the same to that of conviction, the Court has added.
The Apex Court also noted that trial court disbelieved the testimony of PW-1 to PW- 3, by referring to some minor contradiction, but in fact, if their depositions were considered along with the documentary evidence on record and medical evidence, it would be crystal clear that their evidence are natural, trustworthy and acceptable. The Supreme Court relied on its Judgment in case of Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary & Anr Vs State of Maharashtra, wherein the Court has considered the minor contradiction in testimony, while appreciating the evidence in criminal trial. It held that only contradictions in material particulars and not minor contradictions can be ground to discredit the testimony of the witness.
The trial Court in its order of acquittal had said that PW-1 to PW-5 are close relatives of the deceased and moreover there are discrepancies in the statement of PW-1 (wife of deceased) as she has not disclosed about earlier Sessions case against her husband/deceased, PW-2 and their father (the accused-1).
The Apex Court held, “Having regard to evidence on record, as we are of the view that the view taken by the trial court was not at all a possible view and the findings run contrary to the evidence on record, the High court has rightly reversed the judgment of the trial Court by convicting the appellants (A-2 to A-5).” The Accused no 1 was died during the trail and case against him was abated.
Further, the Apex Court has also refused to modify the conviction under Section 302 IPC to Section 304-II, IPC stating that from the evidence on record, it is clear that the assault was intentional which resulted in the death of the deceased and all accused A-2 to A-5 had common object, as such the High Court has rightly convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302/149, IPC etc.
The High Court had reverse the acquittal & convicted the Accused no 2 to 5 and confirmed the acquittal of accused no 6. The High Court believed the oral evidence of PW-1 and PW-2 who were injured witnesses and whose testimony was discredited by the Trial Court. Having regard to the consistent evidence of PWs-1 to 3 as to the occurrence of the incident, as stated in the complaint the High Court had said that the trial court had committed serious error in disbelieving their evidence for the charges against the accused.
Read Also: Bombay High Court dismisses appeal challenging conviction in sexual assault case
The High Court had also considered the testimony of the Medical Officer and held that the occurrence of the incident of assault of the deceased by the accused resulting in spot death of the deceased, is proved beyond the reasonable doubt. The High Court had found the accused guilty of committing the murder of the deceased and causing injuries to PW-1 and PW-2. Further, it had held that all the accused have shared common object of causing death of the deceased, as such all are liable to be convicted for the offence alleged against them.
Read the judgment here;
Rajendra-@-Rajappa-Ors.-Vs-State-of-Karnataka