NDLI: Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Criminal Trial: Evidence
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Criminal Trial: Evidence – Appreciation of – Discrepancies and inconsistencies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses – Effect of – On facts, the appellant-accused persons armed with various weapons assaulted the victim, and also fired gun shots, resulting in his death – Victim was accompanied by his brother, his sister, his wife and PW-2 – When they all came forward to save victim’s life, they were also assaulted and in the assault PW-2 sufferred gunshot injury – Conviction and sentence of the appellants for offences punishable u/s. 302/149, s. 307/149 and s. 148 IPC by the courts below, on basis of the testimonies of an eye witness and an injured witness, which were corroborated from the recoveries made on the basis of memorandum of the accused – On appeal, held: Trial court and the High Court failed to take into consideration the vital discrepancies and inconsistencies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses – From the perusal of the evidence as well as the findings of the trial court itself, it is clear that PW-1 cannot be said to be an eye witness – Though, PW-2 is an injured eye-witness, there are serious discrepancies and inconsistencies with regard to time of the injuries sustained and time of medical examination – Concerned doctor in his evidence, changed his stance on several occasions, his testimony totally contrary to that of both the prosecution witness – As such the possibility of some fabrication in the injury certificate cannot be rejected – Furthermore, not safe to base the conviction on the sole testimony of the injured witness – Corroboration sought by the prosecution with regard to alleged recoveries of the weapons used in the crime also not free from doubt – Neither the station diary entry with regard to telephonic intimation given by the informant brought on record nor informant was examined – Though independent witnesses were available, the prosecution has failed to examine them – As such the possibility of the prosecution not bringing on record the real genesis of the incident cannot be ruled out – In view thereof, the appellants entitled for benefit of doubt – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 302/149, s. 307/149 and s. 148. Constitution of India: Art. 136 – Concurrent findings of fact – Interference with – Reappreciation of evidence – When – Held: Though in cases of concurrent findings of fact this Court would not ordinarily interfere with the said findings, in exceptional circumstances, this Court is empowered to do so – If this Court finds that the appreciation of evidence and findings is vitiated by any error of law or procedure or found contrary to the principles of natural justice, errors of record and misreading of the evidence, or where the conclusions of the High Court are manifestly perverse, this Court has power to reappreciate the evidence.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 810
Petitioner	Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc.
Respondent	State Of Uttar Pradesh
SCR	[2022] 13 S.C.R. 21
Judgement Date	2022-08-10
Case Number	1200

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

Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Kalua Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Padum Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Samman Dass

The State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Khushi Ram

Dharam Das Wadhwani Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Matru Alias Girish Chandra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Ramesh Chandra Etc Vs. State of U.p. Etc.

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Lalloo & Ors.

Vishwanath Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Kalua Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Padum Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Samman Dass

The State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Khushi Ram

Dharam Das Wadhwani Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Matru Alias Girish Chandra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Ramesh Chandra Etc Vs. State of U.p. Etc.

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Lalloo & Ors.

Vishwanath Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh