Content Provider | Supreme Court of India |
---|---|
e-ISSN | 30484839 |
Language | English |
Access Restriction | NDLI |
Subject Keyword | criminal |
Content Type | Text |
Resource Type | Law Judgement |
Jurisdiction | India |
Case Type | Appeal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Disposal Nature | Appeal Allowed |
Headnote | Penal Code, 1860- Sections 34, 354, 302-Appeal against acquittal by High Court-Appreciation of evidence by High Court- Erroneous and resulting in miscarriage of justice. The prosecution's case was that on 28.7.1976 at about 4 P.M. P.W.1, aged 22 years was grazing her sheep in the field. Accused 1 and 2 (the respondents) and one Selvaraj were also grazing their sheep nearby. The accused persons approached P.W.1. When Accused 1 pushed P.W.1 down and pulled up her saree in order to outrange her modesty, the other two stood on either side of her. P.W.1 managed to escape and ran towards the road. The respondents (Accused 1 and 2) were armed with aruvals (sickles). P.W.1's paternal uncle (the deceased) was passing by on his bicycle carrying his 11 year old daughter (P.W .2) from the School. On hearing the shouts of P.W.1, her uncle got down from his bicycle. When P.W.1 was narrating the incident to the deceased, the accused reached there, the accused persons threatened the deceased with dire consequences, when he questioned the accused and told them that the matter would be reported to the Village Panchayat. Accused 2 caught hold of the right hand of the deceased while Accused 1 cut the hand. When the deceased attempted F toward off the cut with his left hand, the thumb and the fingers were severed. Receiving cuts form the Accused 1 on the left hand, head, neck and right shoulder, the deceased fell down. Then the Accused cut off his head with his aruval. When P.W.1 cried on seeing the ghastly sight, P.Ws. 4 and 5 and one Sarvanan came running to the place of occurrence. Accused 2 ran away throwing his arnval and Accused 1 also ran away carrying the head of the deceased and his aruval. Though P.W.5 and one Sarvanan were chasing Accused 1, were returned when they were threatened by the Accused 1 . P.W.4 chased Accused 2 but could not catch him. At about 5.30 P.M., P.W.1 reported to the P.W.6 (the Village Munsif) about the occurrence, which was written down by P.W.6. He went to the place of occurrence. Along with his own report, he sent the P.W.l's Written Statement to the Police Station, sending copies of the same to the local Magistrate. P.W. Hi (the Sub- Inspector) registered a case u/ss. 302 and 354, IPC and commenced investigation. The accused-respondents were tried before the Sessions Judge. The defence denied the charges. The Sessions Judge convicted both the accused-respondents. But they were acquited by the High Court, against which this appeal was filed by the State, by special leave. The appellant-State contended that the High Court had completely misdirected itself with regard to the appreciation of evidence, by lightly dealing "With the evidence of the four eye-witnesses, P.Ws. 1, 2, 4 and 3; that merely because P.W.1 a rustic village Woman did not know the names of P.Ws.4 and 6 it did not mean her evidence was liable to be rejected; that the High Court erred in holding that the evidence of P.W.1 was unreliable, merely on the ground that she was not able to identify P.Ws. 4 and 5 and she could not name them properly; that the evidence of P.W.2, a child witness, who was having no motive against the accused, ought to have been accepted; that the evidence of P.Ws.4 and 6 was rejected on the ground that they did not mention the accused severing the head and carrying the head away; and that the failure of P.W.11 to note the presence of sheep or goats around the scene of occurrence was immaterial. The respondents contended that unless the appreciation of evidence by the High Court was perverse, this Court normally would not interfere against an order of acquittal; that in this case it could not be contended that the appreciation of the evidence by the High Court was perverse, and that it was the duty of the prosecution to establish the guilt beyond all reasonable doubt, which was not established in this case; hence this Court's intereference not warranted. |
Judge | Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Mohan |
Neutral Citation | 1992 INSC 99 |
Petitioner | State Of Tamil Nadu |
Respondent | Karuppusamy And Ors. |
SCR | [1992] 2 S.C.R. 415 |
Judgement Date | 1992-03-31 |
Case Number | 688 |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
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 |