Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals filed by Vidhya Rattan, Rajesh Jogi, Suresh, and Dev Karan, upholding their conviction and life sentences for the murder of Jaibir @ Gabbu and related offences. The incident occurred on 28 July 1994 at 3 a.m. in Bhiwani, Haryana, when the deceased and his friends were consuming liquor in an under-construction house. After an initial altercation between Sandeep (a friend) and accused Krishan and Vidhya Rattan near a liquor shop, the deceased and others returned to the house. Shortly thereafter, seven accused persons, including the appellants, entered the house armed with wooden rafters, lathis, and a sword. Rajesh Yadav (A-1, since deceased) struck the deceased on the head with a wooden rafter, and Krishan gave a lathi blow to the head, causing the deceased to fall. The assault continued, with Suresh hitting the deceased's left leg with a rafter, and all accused indiscriminately beating him. The deceased succumbed to his injuries, and two eyewitnesses, Surender (PW-7) and Ajay Bhan (PW-8), were also injured. The trial court convicted all accused under Sections 148, 302, 307, 325 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 449 IPC, sentencing them to life imprisonment. The High Court dismissed their appeals. Before the Supreme Court, the appellants argued that no charge was framed under Section 141 IPC (defining unlawful assembly), and that Sandeep, the key witness to the initial quarrel, was not examined. The Court rejected these arguments, holding that a separate charge under Section 141 is not necessary for invoking Section 149 IPC, as the existence of an unlawful assembly can be inferred from the evidence. The non-examination of Sandeep did not prejudice the case, as the injured eyewitnesses provided credible and consistent testimony. The Court found that the appellants were members of an unlawful assembly with the common object of murder, and their convictions were justified. The appeals were dismissed, and the sentences were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Unlawful Assembly - Constructive Liability - Section 149 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court held that a separate charge under Section 141 IPC is not a prerequisite for invoking Section 149 IPC; the existence of an unlawful assembly can be determined from the evidence on record, including the common object and the number of persons involved. The appellants were part of an assembly of five or more persons with the common object of murdering the deceased, and thus liable for all offences committed in prosecution of that object (Paras 11-15). B) Criminal Law - Evidence - Non-examination of Witness - The court held that the non-examination of Sandeep, who was allegedly involved in the initial altercation, does not per se vitiate the trial, especially when the prosecution case is otherwise supported by credible eyewitnesses (PW-7 and PW-8) and medical evidence. The trial court and High Court rightly relied on the testimony of the injured witnesses (Paras 10, 16-17). C) Criminal Law - Murder - Common Object - Sections 302, 149 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court upheld the conviction for murder under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, finding that the fatal injury was inflicted by A-1 (since deceased) with a wooden rafter, and the appellants shared the common object to kill the deceased. The presence of multiple injuries on the deceased and the injured witnesses corroborates the prosecution case (Paras 3-5, 18-19).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 148, 302, 307, 325 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 449 IPC is sustainable despite no charge being framed under Section 141 IPC, and whether the non-examination of Sandeep, the alleged initiator of the quarrel, vitiates the trial.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed all four appeals, upholding the conviction and life sentences of the appellants under Sections 148, 302, 307, 325 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 449 IPC. The court held that the appellants were members of an unlawful assembly with the common object of murder, and the absence of a specific charge under Section 141 IPC did not vitiate the trial. The non-examination of Sandeep was not fatal to the prosecution case.
Law Points
- Constructive liability under Section 149 IPC does not require a separate charge under Section 141 IPC
- Unlawful assembly can be inferred from evidence of common object
- Non-examination of a witness does not vitiate trial if other evidence is credible
- Injuries on prosecution witnesses corroborate presence and participation
