NDLI: Chandra Mohan Tiwari and Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Criminal Trial - Accused - Acquittal by Trial Court-Reversal of acquittal by High Court and imposition of life sentence - scope of right of appeal by the accused - scope of interference by Supreme Court in such appeals
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Supreme Court (enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 (28 of 1970)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Code of Criminal Procedure. 1973: Section 379-Scope ofSupreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970: Section 2-Scope of.Constitution of India, 1950: Article 134- Scope ofCriminal Trial- Accused--Acquittal by Trial Court-Reversal of acquittal by High Court and imposition of life sentence-Scope of right of appeal by the accused-Scope of interference by Supreme Court in such appeals.Criminal Trial-Murder-Motive-When motive is equally balanced the Court should look to surrounding circumstances to find out the truth.Criminal Trial-Related witnesses-Reliability of-Murder inside the house at the dead end of night-It is futile to expect the prosecution toproduce independent outsiders as witness-Parents of the deceased are probable and natural witnesses-Held though parents are interested witnesses yet their evidence cannot he rejected simply on the ground that they are interested witnesses--lnterested witnesses are not necessarilyfalse witnesses. The appellants were alleged to have kidnapped, wrongfully confined and raped S, the daughter of PWs 5 and 6. They were prosecuted for offences punishable under sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. S was examined before the Magistrate where she stated that because of the threat given by the appellants and as instructed by them she lodged a false report at the police station implicating some other persons, whereas infact she was kidnapped, wrongfully confined and raped by the appellants. The Magistrate, discharged the first appellant, and committed the second appellant alone to take his trial. On a revision preferred against the order of discharge of the first appellant both the appellants were put up for trial before the third Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal. During the said trial both appellants were on bail. The case was fixed for 21.8.1972 on which date the victim S was to be examined as a prosecution witness. While the matter stood thus S lodged areport at the Police Station complaining that the second appellant had forcibly entered into the backyard of her house, but took to his heels when she raised a hue and cry. However, it was alleged that on the night of 20.8.72, i.e. immediately before the day when the case was fixed and victim S was to be examined as a prosecution witness, the first appellant armed with a pistol and the second appellant with a 'farsa' entered into thehouse of S and the first appellant fired a shot causing instantaneous death of S The appellants were prosecuted for murder. The SessionsJudge acquitted both the appellants. The State preferred an appeal before the High Court. The High Court allowed the appeal, setaside the acquittal order and convicted the first appellant under Section 302 and the second appellant under section 302, read withSection 34 !PC and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. The appellants preferred an appeal to this Court under section379 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 2 (a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)Act, 1970 and it was contended on their behalf (i) that the High Court erred in reviewing the evidence and reversing the order ofacquittal; (ii) that the prosecution has failed to prove the motive of the crime; (iii) the victim's parents were inimical towards the appellants and their evidence cannot be relied upon because they were interested witnesses.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ratnavel Pandian
Neutral Citation	1992 INSC 24
Petitioner	Chandra Mohan Tiwari And Anr.
Respondent	State Of Madhya Pradesh
SCR	[1992] 1 S.C.R. 313
Judgement Date	1992-01-22
Case Number	36

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Chandra Mohan Tiwari and Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Indresh Kumar Vs. Ram Phal and Ors.

Maya Devi & Anr. Vs. State of Haryana

Darshan Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.

Himachal Pradesh Administration Vs. Shri Om Prakash

Pulicherla Nagaraju @nagaraja Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Thanedar Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Romesh Chandra Arora Vs. The State

Ganesh Shamrao Andekar & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Jai Prakash Tiwari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Chandra Mohan Tiwari and Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Chandra Mohan Tiwari and Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Indresh Kumar Vs. Ram Phal and Ors.

Maya Devi & Anr. Vs. State of Haryana

Darshan Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.

Himachal Pradesh Administration Vs. Shri Om Prakash

Pulicherla Nagaraju @nagaraja Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Thanedar Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Romesh Chandra Arora Vs. The State

Ganesh Shamrao Andekar & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Jai Prakash Tiwari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Chandra Mohan Tiwari and Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh