Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Rinku . vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 27 March, 2019
Bench: Arun Mishra, Navin Sinha
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.442/2017
RINKU & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s)
WITH
Crl.A. No. 412/2018 (II)
O R D E R
These appeals arise out of the final Judgment and Order dated 7.11.2009 in Capital Jail Appeal No.4534/2007 passed by the High Court Judicature at Allahabad whereby the High Court has converted the death sentence awarded to the appellants by the Special Sessions Judge, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Sessions Trial No.491/2004 into life sentence and confirmed their conviction for offence under Sections 302, 394, 411 and 307, IPC and under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
The appellants were sentenced to life imprisonment by the High Court and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for offence under Section 302, IPC. They were sentenced to ten years’ rigorous imprisonment each and a fine of Rs.5000/- each for offence under Section 394, IPC. They were convicted under Section 411, IPC and were sentenced to undergo one year imprisonment each and in default Signature Not Verified of payment of fine, each accused was directed to further undergo Digitally signed by R NATARAJAN Date: 2019.04.02 12:56:21 IST Reason: two years’ and one year imprisonment respectively. They were also convicted under Section 307, IPC and were sentenced to undergo five 2 years’ imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months’ imprisonment each. The accused persons Rinku, Samarpal @ Amarpal and Mushahid were also convicted under Section 25 of the Arms Act and were sentenced to undergo two years’ imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each and in default thereof to further undergo two months’ imprisonment each.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. PW-1 (Jagdish Kumar) was the brother of deceased Satish Kumar, and PW-2 (Mangat Ram Sharma) was the father of the other deceased Deepak. PW-5 (Vinod Kumar) was the owner of the Tata Sumo, which was being driven by deceased Satish Kumar on the day of the incident on 28.8.2004. All the three witnesses stated that they could identify the persons who were present with the deceased victims on 28.8.2004, and PW-5 further recalled the names of the said persons as Ganga Prasad, Musahid, Samarpal and Rinku. The witnesses also stated that on 5.9.2004, the same persons were nabbed by the police, upon being informed of their presence in PW- 5’s vehicle. Three persons were caught on the spot, and one person fled, after firing at the police officials, and country made pistols and cartridges were found in possession of each of them.
PW-3 (Dr. A.K. Jain) performed the autopsy on the deceased, and concluded that death of both the deceased was due to asphyxia due to strangulation. The High Court also observed that there was no possibility of enmity between the witnesses and and the accused persons. PW-4 (Nanhu Singh) is the village watchman who filed the complaint, and PW-9 (Ramveer Singh) registered the same. PW-6 3 (K.P.Singh) was the SHO of the police station where the said report was lodged and PW-7 (Khettal Singh) was the Head Constable in the same police station. PW-8 (Satish Kumar) received the investigation of the case. Furthermore, accused Ganga Prasad also led to the recovery of the mobile phone of deceased Satish. Upon examination of the statements of the witnesses, the High Court found that the statements of the witnesses corroborate each other, and that the prosecution case was proved beyond doubt.
In the facts and circumstances of the case and aforesaid evidence on record, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order. The appeals deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed.
The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled and they are directed to surrender before the concerned trial Court within a period of 15 days failing which they shall be taken into custody by the concerned police authorities.
………………….J. [ARUN MISHRA] ………………….J. [NAVIN SINHA] NEW DELHI;
MARCH 27, 2019.
4
ITEM NO.111 COURT NO.4 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 442/2017
RINKU & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s)
WITH
Crl.A. No. 412/2018 (II)
Date : 27-03-2019 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Appellant(s) Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv.
Ms. Anima Kujur, Adv.
Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR Mr. Dushyant Parashar, AOR Mr. Surya Kant, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Vishnu Shankar Jain, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (JAGDISH CHANDER)
COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
[signed order is placed on the file]