Supreme CourtDivision Bench(1998) 03 SC CK 0087

Baij Nath vs State of U.P.

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 16 March 1998 · Citation: (1998) 2 ACR 981 : (1998) 3 AD 120 : AIR 1998 SC 1654 : (1998) AIRSCW 1397 : (1998) 1 ALD(Cri) 681 : (1998) 2 ALT(Cri) 1 : (1998) CriLJ 2059 : (1998) 2 Crimes 22 : (1998) 2 JT 584 : (1998) 2 SCALE 426 : (1998) 3 Supreme 137 : (1998) 1 UJ 740

HON’BLE JUDGES
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J · G. T. Nanavati, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 327 of 1998 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.3014/97)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 240 words

Nanavati, J.—Leave granted.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appellant - Baij Nath has been convicted u/s 304 Part II read with Section 149 IPC. It was alleged against him that he had provoked his co-accused to kill Devi Charan.

3.

After perusing the evidence, we find that all the witnesses had made consistent improvements regarding the role played by Baij Nath. In the FIR, the only role alleged to have been played by him was that he had provoked others to kill Devi Charan. Before the Court, all these witnesses stated that Baij Nath had also given blows to Devi Charan. There was no other evidence against him except the evidence of those three witnesses who, as stated above, had made material improvement regarding the rote played by Baij Nath. There was no corroborative evidence to show that Baij Nath was present at the time of the incident. The courts below were therefore in error in convicting the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 304 Part II read with Section 149 IPC.

4.

As we are of the view that his presence at the time of the incident has not been satisfactorily established, he deserves to be given benefit of doubt. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside his conviction u/s 304 Part II read with Section 149 IPC and acquit him of the charge leveled against him.

5.

His bail bonds are ordered to be cancelled.