Attempt To Murder Case: Allahabad High Court Delivers Split Verdict In Appeal Against Acquittal Of Rebel SP MLA

The Allahabad High Court on Friday delivered a split verdict in an appeal filed against the acquittal of rebel Samajwadi Party MLA Abhay Singh in connection with the 2010 attempt-to-murder case. The matter has now been referred to the Chief Justice for nomination of a fresh bench. While Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi sentenced five of the accused, including Abhay Singh, to three years of imprisonment in connection with the 2010 case, Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, on the other hand, dismissed the appeal and upheld the sessions court's 2023 Judgment acquitting all the accused. Justice Masoodi noted that the findings of acquittal recorded by the trial court were erroneous, perverse and are not based on correct appreciation of evidence available on record. Justice Srivastava, however, noted that the trial court's judgment does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality and the same is not perverse. “In view of difference of opinion between the members of the Bench, let the record of the Criminal Appeal be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice under Section 433 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 392 Code of Criminal Procedure) for nomination of Bench,” the December 20th order reads. The case in brief Vikas Singh (Appellant/Complaint/Informant) reported to the police in May 2010 alleging that while he was travelling from Faizabad to his village Devgarh with his friend Dharmendra Singh (the driver) and cousins Vansh Bahadur Singh and Ajit Pratap Singh, they were overtaken by a car. He alleged that the car stopped ahead of them, and several people, including Abhay Singh, Rama Kant Yadav, Ravi Kant Yadav, Shambhu Nath Singh, and Sandeep Singh, got out of the car and without giving him any warning, 3 of them fired at their car with the intent to kill them, shouting threats and using abusive language. However, since his driver drove away quickly, their lives was saved. After an FIR was lodged, the complainant was allegedly admitted to a district hospital, where he was under treatment for three days. Now, pursuant to the competition of the investigation, a chargesheet was filed against them. However, after considering the evidence on record and the testimony of the injured witness, the trial court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and consequently acquitted all the accused persons of the charges levelled against them. Challenging their acquittal, Vikas-Singh moved the High Court through Advocate Naved Ali, contending that the medical and vehicle inspection reports fully supported the testimony of the injured witness, Vikas Singh, and that the trial court should not have dismissed it due to minor contradictions. It was strongly argued that the trial court committed an error in discarding the testimony of the injured witness [Vikas Singh (P.W.-2)], whose testimony was fully supported by documentary evidence, i.e., the injury report and the technical report of the vehicle given by a Technical Expert. Refuting the assertions of the Counsel for the appellant, the advocates for the accused-respondents contended that the learned trial court had rightly acquitted the accused persons of the charges levelled against them as the prosecution had utterly failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It was strongly submitted that Dharmendra Singh (P.W.1), who was said to be driving the vehicle, had not supported the prosecution version and was declared hostile, and thereafter, there remained only the eye-witness account of the complainant; however, his testimony was not found worth credible by the trial court. Perusing the trial court's judgment and the evidence adduced by the prosecution, Justice Masoodi noted that the trial court had proceeded with the premise that no such incident as narrated in the FIR had taken place in the manner as alleged. “…(the trial court) overlooked the vital fact that the injured witness whose vehicle was also damaged would not falsely implicate the accusedrespondents and allow the actual assailants, who in fact were identified in the headlight of the vehicle, to go scot-free,” Justice Masoodi observed. Justice Masoodi added that both accused Abhay Singh and appellant Vikas Singh have criminal antecedents, but this does not mean that false imputations have been made. Regarding the declaration of PW-1 (Dharmendra Singh/Driver) as a hostile witness, Justice Masoodi noted that denying the entire prosecution story by PW-1 reflects the fear and terror of accused Abhay Singh, as was stated in the FIR. The Court also factored in that the statement of PW1 before the Court was recorded more than seven years after the incident, allowing ample time to influence the witness and to win over him by adopting all kinds of tactics familiar to law. In view of this, finding error in the trial court's...

Attempt To Murder Case: Allahabad High Court Delivers Split Verdict In Appeal Against Acquittal Of Rebel SP MLA

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags