CODE: TC-51

5TH INDRAPRASTHA NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2016

BEFORE
THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPEAL FILED UNDER ARTICLE136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA, 1950
STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
(APPELLANT)
V.

JEYSHA AND OTHERS
(RESPONDENT)

COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

-Table of Contents -

- Appellant TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................................................................................................I
LIST OF ABBREVIATION...................................................................................................II
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES.................................................................................................III
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION......................................................................................V
STATEMENT OF FACTS.....................................................................................................VI
THE STATEMENT OF ISSUES..........................................................................................IX
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS.............................................................................................X
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED...................................................................................................1
1. THAT THE CRIMINAL APPEAL BY SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS
MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT.......................................................1
2. THAT THE STATEMENT OF SH. BALLAN IS CREDIBLE AND THE GUILT OF
THE RESPONDENTS WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE APPELLANT-PROSECUTION
BEYOND ALL THE REASONABLE DOUBTS BASED ON CLINCHING EVIDENCES
TO HOLD ACCUSED PERSONS GUILTY TO THE OFFENCE AND THEIR
ACQUITTAL RESULTED IN GRAVE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE..............................2
2.1.Ballan is a ‘Natural Witness’........................................................................................2
2.2 That even if he is proven to be an interested witness his testimony is not to be
discarded out rightly:..........................................................................................................4
2.3 That the statement of star witness Sh. Ballan is credible:............................................4
2.4 That respondents had evil intention thus they had motive to commit crime:............10
2.5 That the subsequent conduct of the respondents after the commission of crime can be
used against them:............................................................................................................10
2.6 That in criminal justice system we have to ensure a fair trial where the accused and
the prosecution both get a fair deal and the guilty man does not escape:........................12
2.7 That the high court has failed to take notice of the entire facts of the case:..............12
2.8. That examination of the evidence ought to have been done carefully by the High
Court and cogent and convincing reasons have to be given by the court before terming
Ballan’s statement “unacceptable” and interfering with the conviction:.........................13
3. THAT THE RESPONDENTS BE GIVEN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT..........................14
3.1 There was mensrea and the injury was sufficient to cause death:..............................14
3.2. A sentence of death is justified in the present case...................................................15
1

-Table of Contents -

- Appellant -

4. THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AWARDED BY THE TRIAL COURT UNDER
SECTION 357A OF CR.P.C., 1973, IS NOT ADEQUATE HENCE THE SAME HAS TO
BE ENHANCED..................................................................................................................19
PRAYER..............................................................................................................................XIII

2

e.A. Uttar Pradesh UoI Union of India v.R. Assistant Sub-Inspector Anr. Andhra Pradesh A.P.C.J. Namely Vol.L.C.E. Supreme Court S. All India Reporter A.Appellant LIST OF ABBREVIATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 &And §/ S. Criminal Law Journal Cr.-List of Abbrevation - . Edition FIR First Information Report Hon’ble Hon’ble i. Supreme Court Cases S. That is I.C. Investigating Officer NCT National Capital Territory Ors.O. Another Art. Article Cr.H.C. Criminal Procedure Code Ed. Others r/wRead With.I. S.O.S.P. Station House Officer S/o Son of SCR Supreme Court Reporter U.I. Indian Evidence Act I. 2 . United Kingdom U. Versus viz.K. Volume. Section ¶ Paragraph A.P.

............. Chandagiram. State of Punjab...........2.... (1993 ) 3 SCC 282..2 Haresh Mohandas Rajput v.15 Jai Kumar v.................................1 Sarwan Singh and Ors....................................State of U..........16 Jayabalan v...... State (Delhi Admin...... 14 Chaudhari Ramjibhai Narsanghbai v. State of U.............................. AIR 2003 SC 886....................... (2014) 4 SCC 596.............................................17 Machhi Singh v.................10 Raj Narain Singhv.... AIR 2004 SC 313.................. (2008) 8 SCC 270..........................................9 Dinesh Kumar v.............. (1976) 1 SCC 181............... (1995) 3 SCC 228................. (1994) 2 SCC 220..........12 Ramnaresh v................. (1988) 3 SCC 609.... AIR 2002 SC 3462... AIR 2010 SC 1378...15 Labh Singh v..... State of U.............................B.......................... (1976 ) 2 SCC 788............ State of Punjab. (1951) 52 Cri LJ 1172............................State of Punjab.................6 Macchi Singh v.......................-Index of Authorities- ........................................ (1999) 5 SCC 1.17 Harpal Singh v... State of U................................ (2010) 7 SCC 759. Ashok Kumar Srivastava............. State of Gujarat.............................................................. 6 Kehar Singh v................... AIR 1983 SC 957........ NCT of Delhi and Another.3 Devender Pal Singh v..................)................ State of Rajasthan.............8 Dharnidhar v.......P............................................................P...............................4 Sardul Singh v...... (2016) 3 SCC 317......................................... State of Bihar.............................. 11 Sardul Singh v... State of Haryana.....13........................................................ Devinder Singh.......P.......... State of Punjab..............v................................. State.. State of Maharashtra.................................... and Ors................. v..................................................................... (2009) 10 SCC 362................................................17 Khairdi Khan v.P.............................6 Jayaraj v..................................................................17 DhananjoyChatterjee v..................AppellantsINDEX OF AUTHORITIES CASES State of U. State of Haryana..... State of W......1 Anil Phukan v............... (1992) 2 SCC 86................. State of Assam........................ State of Punjab.....8 Harbans Kaur v....17 Bavisetti Kameshwara Rao @ Babai v................3 Bachan Singh v. UT of Pondicherry.......... State of Assam.. (2010) 1 SCC 199............................................7 Jagmohan Singh v............ (2012) 4 SCC 257........................ (1973) 1 SCC 20.. (2011) 12 SCC 56..5.............................P..... State of M.. State of Tamil Nadu.......... AIR 2002 SC 3462..................11 Sahabuddin v.... Crown...... State of Chhattisgarh..............................18 Nankaunoo v.....16 Dharamveer v......... AIR 2008 SC 1854..P............8 Rajasthan v.......................8 Prem Kumar v.............. (1980) 2 SCC 684......................... State of Andhra Pradesh.............4 3 .................................. State of Uttar Pradesh... State of Haryana............. (2012) 13 SCC 213......................... (2005) 9 SCC 195.............................. (1976) 4 SCC 369.... (1983) 3 SCC 470............. (1997) 6 SCC 660.........................

................. 1971 SCC OnLine Raj 71.. (2011) 6 SCC 343.............1 1 Chief Justice Monir............................................ Manohar Lal..... ( 4th ed...............................18 4 Sohoni’s. 17 R... State of Maharashtra................4 Alamgir v.....1 State of U.......2 State of U... AIR1981SC1390........................................................15 Sunil Kundu v.............. AIR 2004 SC 491.9...................... Harihar Bux Singh..........................V.....AIR 1965 SC 277..... AIR 1981 SC 2073.............................. Jawan Singh... State of Jharkhand............................... 1972........................ AIR 2001 SC 164.....................16 Shriram v State of Madhya Pradesh...........5 Shankar Kishanrao Khade v.............. Ltd...............8 Suresh v.......7............... State of Gujarat.................... v......... Eastern Book Company 2014).........................1...1 State of U....... State of Madras......(16th ed...10 State v..16 Vadivelu Thevar v................................15................ (1975) 3 SCC 167.......................................................... Lexis Nexis 2015)....1 State of Rajasthan v.........1 State v...................... State(NCT. 1973.................... State of Gujarat........................ Nagpur 2006)......................... AIR 1957 Bom 226......... State of Punjab................................................................................................ State of Karnataka......... Ram Naik............. Islam......5 Takhaji Hiraji v.. 2012............ (21st ed.......3 Shyamal Ghosh v.......... Universal Law Publishing Co............ Criminal Procedure 639 (6th ed.... Kelkar...AIR 2007 SC 2531............................ 11 4 ....... Code of Criminal Procedure............ State of Bihar.....3 Ugar Ahir v...............................P....................P.......... All India Reporter Pvt............ Shankar Sakharam Jadhav and another.................2013).....................................3...........7 BOOKS 5 Durga Das Basu’s Commentary on the Constitution of India (8th ed.... v........12 Swamy Shraddananda v. 1957 Cri LJ 1000......... Cr LJ 3837 (SC)................................ (1992) 2 SCC 86....................... Delhi)...... Lexis Nexis BW Nagpur 2009)............19 STATUTES Code of Criminal Procedure.................................................. State of West Bangal............................. 10 Tapubha Bhagvanji v............1............ The Indian Penal Code...........Appellants- Sarwan Singh v.....................9 Surendra Pratap Chauhan v.. Thakore Kubersing Chamansing....................................................... (2001) 6 SCC 145................... (2003) 1 SCC 21....................................Law of Evidence............... (1976) 4 SCC 369....... 11 Indian Evidence Act........ AIR 2002 SC 2794.............. 1872.................. AIR 1975 SC 783............... (2013) 4 SCC 422..........4 3 Manohar and Chitaley........................ Kalki and Anr................................P..................................................... 7................................... (2013) 5 SCC 546... Ashok Kumar Srivastava...................... State of Maharshtra.....-Index of Authorities- .. v............. (2011) 10 SCC 158.................. 12 State of Rajasthan v..17 Takdir Samsuddin Sheikh v...........

JAYESHA AND OTHERS …Respondent The Petitioners humbly submit this memorandum for the Special Leave Petition filed before this Hon’ble Court.-Statement of Jurisdiction- -AppellantSTATEMENT OF JURISDICTION STATE (NCT OF DELHI) …Petitioner V. by invoking the Appellate Jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court specified under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THE APPELLANT HUMBLY AND RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS TO THE JURISDICTION OF THIS HON’BLE COUR 5 . This memorandum sets forth the facts. contentions and arguments for the petitioners in the given case.

S. 2015. at around 11:30 pm. Harpal Singh and his team with few superficial injuries inflicted on his back. A. III Sh. A. named Lallan Prasad.I Harpal Singh and a constable on duty immediately rushed to the 3D Hospital where they found that Sh. Since then their cousins were not happy and developed inimical relations with them. In these conditions Sh. the rest of the brothers and Tashi dragged Lallan into a small gali andJeysha started stabbing Lallan.S. Ballan. admitted him in a critical condition. they all ranaway immediately except Tashi who was caught by the public.” As a consequence.S. Ballan. on 23rd Janaury 2016. after having dinner. When Ballan shouted loudly in the market. Harpal Singh and his team took him to the crime spot where they found lot of blood strewed over the road and Tashi. The doctor suggested that the patient is unfit for statement and declared that the injuries were perpetrated with a sharp edged weapon. A. After this investigation. at around 12:35am. who was caught by the public.S. he and his deceased brother Lallan went for a walk near Budh Bazaar Road. Lallan was admitted by his brother Sh. aged 21 years. gave his statement in 3D Hospital that they were having a property dispute casewith their maternal uncle and his sons since 2003.I. Ballan was made star witness of the case. another brother of the victim Lallan Prasad. Lallan was carried to the 3DHospital through an auto-rickshaw by Ballan.I. On receiving the information. Mallan with multiple stab wounds on both arms. Bishaan. scalp and right side of the gluteal region. In the meantime.-Statement of Facts- -AppellantSTATEMENT OF FACTS I That on 24 January 2016. Disham and Geysha ran towards the fighting spot and got involved in the fight.I. Mallan brother of victim. They caught Lallan and one of them named Geysha gave instructions to others by shouting “IskaKaamKhatmKar do. A. one of their cousins named Jeysha and his friend Tashi started fighting with him.S. II According to statement of Sh. Harpal Singh and his team came 6 . was arrested by A. chest wall. The decision of the case was held in their favour in August.I Harpal Singh got an information from a constable over telephone at 3D Hospital that Sh. Lallan was stepping faster and when he was 50-60 ahead of Ballan. Someone called the police while seeing Ballan shouting in the street. Jeysha’s four brothers named Kishan.

” PW-3 Doctor Kamini. PW-2 Mallan deposed that “I was at my friend’s house which was near the 3D Hospital. he asked me to take care of Lallan and then he went to the nearby PCO and started calling our parents and other relatives for further assistance. When Ballan saw me. As soon as I got the information.O. liver etc.-Statement of Facts- -Appellant- back to Police Station. large intestine. On 24th January 2016. Sonia Vihar.R was recorded on the basis of the statement provided by Ballan and observation of the entire crime spot at around 3:15 am and charged all the respondentaccused persons under Section 307/34 of the IPC. at around 81:15 pm. She presented the victim’s Schematic Injury Diagram Sheet along with the Medico Legal Report-02 (i. 7 . The S.O. On 30th January 2016. the police team arrested the rest of the co-accused persons. and gave the report to the S. IV That prosecution examined the material witness PW-1 Ballan deposed the same version of statement as he delivered earlier in the 3D Hospital to the police officers.H. Other co-accused persons were arrested after few days i. who was in the hands of my brother..e.. Sonia Vihar. Jeysha deliberately took the knife and threw it into the river Ghaggar near Ambala. Then the I. on 30th January. 2016 at around 8:15pm. P. Post Mortem Report) according to which a total number of 21 injuries were suffered by the deceased on various parts of body.e. added one more Section 201 of the IPC to the existing criminal case. We had arrested all the accused persons.O as I. All the respondnetaccused persons were charged under Sections 302/201/34 of the IPC. Ballan.. the crime scene”.H. One of the accused Tashi was caught by the public and arrested immediately. Lallan who was admitted in a very critical condition succumbed to his injuries.O.S. a chief medical officer. left and right kidneys. deposed that the victim is examined and the injuries are sufficient to cause death of the victim. of the case immediately changing the previous charges registered the murder case under Sections 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter the F. We failed to collect any witness from the public regarding the incident i. I immediately rushed to the 3D Hospital and saw my brother. Lallan. Lallan. in a very critical condition. injuries were lethal to the extent that many of them were piercing internal organs of the body viz..e. They interrogated Jeysha and claim to find that while running away from the crime scene. at around 8:15 am Sh. The doctor restricted us from taking any statement from the victim because of his serious condition. PW-4 Investigation Officer deposed that “we met the victim.I.

and dismissed the appeal of the State. 302 r/w Sec.-Statement of Facts- -AppellantV That all the statements of the accused persons under Section 313 Cr. the reason being bereft of any substance and rejected the testimony of Ballan considering it fabricated and concocted statement of an interested party. 8 . VI Aggrieved by the said judgment of the Hon’ble High Court acquitting all the accused persons.302 r/w Sec. and sentenced each of them to life imprisonment. State filed an appeal for demanding the death sentence for the accused persons for such a heinous crime and for the enhancement of the amount of compensation taking into account the expenditure incurred in upbringing the dead victim Lallan Prasad by his old parents.C.. The State also appealed for considering the offence as heinous crime and to award death sentence to all the accused persons under Sec 302 r/w Sec. appealed before the Hon’ble High Court seeking acquittal. That Sessions Court convicted all the accused persons under Sec.C. Whereas. Both the sentences were to run concurrently. were taken wherein they stated that they were being falsely implicated due to the previous enmity with the complainant and his family members and they knew nothing about this event. Each of them was awarded rigorous imprisonment for 2 years under Section 201 IPC.P. the State filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on the ground that Hon’ble High Court has failed to take notice of the entire facts of the case as all the accused persons had a motive to harm the Prasad Family. 201 and 34 IPC. Then accused persons aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment. The High court adjudicated in the favour of the accused persons by acquitting them from all the charges under Sec. 201 and 34 IPC. 201 and 34 IPC and also to enhance the compensation awarded by the Sessions Court to Rupees Ten Lakhs under Sec 357A Cr. They were also asked to pay compensation of Rupees Two Lakhs to the parents of Lallan immediately.P.

.-Appellant STATEMENT OF ISSUES  I. II. BALLAN IS CREDIBLE AND THE GUILT OF THE RESPONDENTS WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE APPELLANT-PROSECUTION BEYOND ALL THE REASONABLE DOUBTS BASED ON CLINCHING EVIDENCES TO HOLD ACCUSED PERSONS GUILTY TO THE OFFENCE AND THEIR ACQUITTAL RESULTED IN GRAVE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.P.      9 . 1973.-Statement of Issues. III. IS NOT ADEQUATE HENCE THE SAME HAS TO BE ENHANCED.C. THAT THE RESPONDENTS BE GIVEN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. IV. THAT THE CRIMINAL APPEAL BY SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT. THAT THE STATEMENT OF SH. THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AWARDED BY THE TRIAL COURT UNDER SECTION 357A OF Cr.

Ballan’s statement to be fabricated and concocted terming his testimony to be unacceptable for his being interested witness despite interested witness being competent witness to testify under section 118 of Indian Evidence Act.  2. ballan being sole eye witness to the incident. alleged inimical relationship. That the statement of sh. his testimony was consistent and corroborating with the medico legal report. thus it becomes important grant leave to appeal in the instant case. 1872. all these factors lend credence to his testimony. d) There were clinching evidences towards the guilt of the accused-respondents but Hon’ble Delhi High Court had glaring infirmity in appraisal of evidences. b) Even if Sh. facts like Sh. his relationship with the deceased victim should not have any bearing upon the testimony of an eye-witness.I. b) Hon’ble Delhi High Court has failed to take notice of the entire facts of the instant case. Ballan is credible and the guilt of the respondents was established by the appellant-prosecution beyond all the reasonable doubts based on clinching evidences to hold accused persons guilty to the offence and their acquittal resulted in grave miscarriage of justice: a) Ballan is a ‘Natural Witness’. non-recovery of murder weapon will have no bearing upon the prosecution’s case despite 10 . there was prompt lodging of F. c) The finding of the Hon’ble High Court was not reasonable one when it termed Sh. ensuring that no innocent man is punished and also that a guilty man does not escape.R.examination of other witnesses. e) Court has to perform its basic duties viz.. Sh.-Summary of Arguments- -Appellant SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS   1. Ballan is proven to be an interested witness his testimony is not to be discarded out rightly because he had ring of truth his testimony. non. Ballan is not interested in securing the conviction of the accused persons because there is no reason for him to falsely implicate Jeysha and his brothers along with Tashi.That the criminal appeal by special leave petition is maintainable before this Hon’ble court: a) Interference with the order ofHon’ble Delhi High Court acquitting all accused-respondent under Article 136 of the Constitution is necessary because the same has resulted in resulted in grave miscarriage of justice. c) There is no infirmity in the case of prosecution.

A.E. f) TheHon’ble High Court has failed in its mandate to ensure a fair trial where the accused and the prosecution both get a fair deal and the guilty man does not escape but here in the instant case we see examination of the evidence was not done carefully and cogent and convincing reasons were given by the court before terming Ballan’s statement “unacceptable” and interfering with the conviction given by Trial Court. Besides this the subsequent conduct of the respondents after the commission of crime is alos to be used against them when Jayesha and his brothers managed to disappear from the crime scene and Tashi was caught.  3. That the respondents be given capital punishment: a) There was mensreaand the injury was sufficient to cause death and was also inflicted in furtherance of a common intention. the evidence on record bears out the case of the prosecution and the evidence is of sterling quality. The medico legal report reveals that a total of 21 injuries were present on the victim’s body including four deep wounds. d) All of the evidences point towards the guilty intention of all of the accused and the aggravating circumstances in the present case clearly outweigh the mitigating circumstance hence justifying the need of awarding of death sentence. e) The facts clearly depict the plight of the victim and the extreme brutality with which he was murdered.-Summary of Arguments- -Appellant- their existence. Jeysha along with his four brothers and his friend Tashi engaged into a fight with the deceased and further dragged him into a small gali and started stabbing him which goes to show that there was indeed an intention to cause death of the accused. when Ballan raised alarm. d) Respondents had inimical relations with Lallan so it can be said that they had motive to commit crime which is relevant under section 8 of I.. All these facts show that the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause of the accused. callous. A sentence of death will be proper where the case is one of cold blooded.The medico legal report also suggests that the offence was committed outrageously and involved inhumane treatment and torture to the victim. e) The Hon’bleHigh Court has failed to take notice of the entire facts of the case. c) This case calls for the imposition of extreme sentence of death to all of the accused because of the extreme brutality involved in it and the cruelty with which the offence was executed. and vindictive character or where the murder is committed for lust or greed. 11 . cumulative effect of all the circumstances has to be considered if we were to reach upon a rationale conclusion. b) The injury so inflicted was sufficient to cause death of the deceased. 1872.

000.00. The compensation amount awarded by the trial court under section 357A of Cr.  4. b) Since the rehabilitation is of paramount importance.. 1973. state is bound to take adequate compensatory measure irrespective of whether the respondents in the instant case are guilty or not hence the Hon’ble Supreme Court has to enhance the compensation amount from Rs..C. 357A of Cr. is not adequate hence the same has to be enhanced: a) Sec.00. 10.   12 .C.P. 1973.000 to Rs.-Summary of Arguments- -Appellant- Where the murder committed is cold blooded. 2. who have suffered loss or injury as a result of crime and who require rehabilitation.P. it is rarest of rare case justifying extreme sentence of death. is meant to provide compensation to the victim or his dependent. gruesome and heinous.

C. The testimony of star witness Sh. we find that the approach of the 1(2012) Cr.C. ordered acquittal on surmises and conjectures and not in accordance with settled principle of law 5. 5State of U. 343. 3State of U. v. 6State of Rajasthan v. 1981 S. 2073. v. The High Court did not consider the case properly and. ManoharLal. THAT THE CRIMINAL APPEAL BY SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT.C.C. State of Haryana.C. 369.  It is submitted that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has clearly erred in reversing the order of conviction recorded by the Trial Court which consequentlyresulted in grave miscarriage of justice.I. It won’t be wrong to say that High Court has completely misdirected itself in reversing the order of conviction by the trial court thereby adducing compelling and substantial reasons to this court to consider this appeal against the order of acquittal. 86 .J.C. State of West Bangal. The finding of the Hon’ble High Court was not reasonable one2 and it is vitiated by some glaring infirmity in appraisal of evidences 3 when it found Sh.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants  ARGUMENTS ADVANCED   1.(1976) 4 S. 3462. the guilt of the accused-respondents is proven to be established by the appellant-prosecution beyond all the reasonable doubts based on clinching evidences and their acquittal resulted in grave miscarriage of justice.A.167. In the impugned judgment the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has failed to take notice of the entire facts as opposed to this court’s judgment in Shyamal Ghoshv. Ballan’s statement to be fabricated and concocted terming his testimony to be unacceptable for his being interested witness despite interested witness being competent witness to testify under section 118 of Indian Evidence Act. 5866. Islam. 1 .I. A. HariharBux Singh. in the instant case too.6  Ordinarily. in an acquittal this Court is slow to interfere while exercising power under Article 136 of the Constitution but in accordance with this court’s judgment in State of U. 4Sardul Singh v. His version was natural and there was nothing to suspect their version in narrating the occurrence.C. ¶ 14. ¶ 12. 7(1992) 2 S. Ashok Kumar Srivastava7. State of West Bengal 1.P. Lexis Nexis BW Nagpur 2009).R 2002 S.C. (1975) 3 S. 3837.R. 1872 4.P. L.P. Ballan is absolutely convincing and is corroborative in every minute aspect of the occurrence.C. Constitution of India. 25 Durga Das Basu’sCommentary.Shyamal Ghosh v. ¶ 16.C. (2011) 6 S. v. (8th ed.

BALLAN IS CREDIBLE AND THE GUILT OF THE RESPONDENTS WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE APPELLANTPROSECUTION BEYOND ALL THE REASONABLE DOUBTS BASED ON CLINCHING EVIDENCES TO HOLD ACCUSED PERSONS GUILTY TO THE OFFENCE AND THEIR ACQUITTAL RESULTED IN GRAVE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. This court denying this contention said that there is no proposition in law that relatives are to be treated as untruthful witnesses. on the ground that the prosecution version was based on testimony of relatives and hence it did not inspire confidence. 'Related' is not equivalent to 'interested'.9  Recently.J. State of Assam. 213. the accused. Ballan S/o ShChander Prasad.8  2. A witness may be called 'interested' only when he or she derives some benefit from the result of litigation.I. 195. and the only person who witnessed the attack on deceased victim Lallan.C. (2012) 13 S. THAT THE STATEMENT OF SH. It is not possible for this Court to refuse to interfere when a gruesome crime is committed which has resulted in the extinction of the life of Lallan. they were set free against the order of conviction by trial court. ensuring that no innocent man is punished and also that a guilty man does not escape thereby doing justice to all. 2 .  2.C.1 Ballan is a ‘Natural Witness’:  It is submitted that Sh. 10(2005) Cri. inter alia. 9State of Rajasthan v.R. On the contrary.C.2199: (2005) 9 S. A witness who is a natural one and is the only possible eye witness in the circumstances of a case cannot be said to be 'interested'. reason has to be shown when a plea of partiality is 8Sahabuddin v.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - High Court has resulted in gross miscarriage of justice when despite the presence of clinching evidences towards the guilt of the accused-respondents.C. State of Haryana10 the conviction of the accused was challenged in this Court. 1390. brother of the deceased is the only and most natural witness thus not an interested witness. or in seeing an accused person punished.C.. ¶ 5. in HarbansKaurv. the society and a fair chance to prove to the prosecution.L. 1981S. He cannot be called an 'interested' witness though he is related to the deceased.Kindly grant leave to appeal so that the court can perform its basic duties viz. he was the only person present with the deceased at the time of the occurrence. Kalki and Anr. A. in the decree in a civil case.

3 .13  In ChaudhariRamjibhaiNarsanghbaiv.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - raised to show that the witnesses had reason to shield actual culprit and falsely implicate the accused. it has been held that even if a witness is related to the deceased. Ballan’s relationship with the deceased victim should not have any bearing upon his testimony.I. The decision of the case had already been held in Ballan and his brother’s favor in August. “Mere relationship with the deceased is no ground to discard his testimony. 2004 S. 313. 14A. a close relation would be the last person to spare the real assailant of his uncle and implicate a false person”12.C. State of Madhya Pradesh. Since then it is the cousins of Ballan who were not happy and they consequently developed inimical relations with Ballan and his brother 15 and there is no reason for Sh. if it is otherwise found to be reliable and trustworthy” said this court in Anil Phukanv. In such case the court has to analyse the evidence carefully with deeper scrutiny to find out whether the evidence suffers from unreality or infirmity in law. 13Shriram v.1. Jeysha. 11(1993 )3S.  The relationship of eye-witness with the family of the deceased does not render per se his evidence suspect.2 Ballan is not interested in securing the conviction of the accused persons:  It is to be noted that Sh.C. It is more after than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person.  2. 12Id. AIR 2004 SC 491. Ballan has no business to deal with Tashi. 282. Disham and Geysha in fact Sh. Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made.1 Relationship with the deceased victim should not have any bearing upon the testimony of an eye-witness:  It is humbly submitted that Sh.e. ¶ 4. there is no reason to discard his evidence if he is reliable and trustworthy. 2. 15Moot Problem ¶ 3. Disham and Geysha since 2003. 2015. Kishan. Ballan to falsely implicate Jeysha and his brothers Kishan. Bhishaan. Relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witness.1. Bishaan. Ballan and his brothers were having a property dispute casewith their maternal uncle and his sons i.C.R. State of Gujarat14.State of Assam11and it further observed that “in the normal course of events.

I.C.  It was further observed in the above decision that there might be circumstances where only interested evidence might be available and no other. observed that even though an eyewitness might have belong to the group of the deceased and that witness came from one particular group was sufficient to show the interested nature of evidence.  2. and there is no reason to show for them to falsely implicate the accused. State of Haryana17. State of Gujarat16 where this court held that when a witness is alleged to be interested are examined and crossexamined. speaking for a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. was that the evidence of such witness should be scrutinized with a little care. it has been held that evidence of interested witnesses should be scrutinized more carefully to find whether it has a ring of truth and if found acceptable and seem to inspire confidence too. All that the Courts required as a rule of prudence. But it was not the law that the evidence of an interested witness should be equated with that of tainted evidence or that of an approver so as to require corroboration as a matter of necessity.R. e.C.I.g. 530. (if judge raises objection that there were discrepancies)  In Sarwan Singh v.C.C . when an occurrence took place in absence of no other witness. 2794: (2002) 6 S. but once such witness was scrutinized with a little 16 A. MurtzaFazal Ali. not as a rule of law. their depositions are to be accepted. State of Punjab18.R. as His Lordship then was.-Arguments Advanced -Appellants - In this regard reference can be made to TapubhaBhagvanjiv. 3462. the Hon'ble Justice S. the same cannot be discharged totally merely on account of certain veracious or infirmities pointed or additions and embellishments noticed unless they are of such a nature as to undermine the substratum of the evidence and found to be tainted to the case. 4 . 1872 and it is settled position of law that testimony of an interested witness is acceptable. 17A.369. 2002 S. 2002 S.C. in the mind of the court.2 That even if he is proven to be an interested witness his testimony is not to be discarded out rightly:  It is submitted that the competency of a witness to testify has been contained in Section 118 of Indian Evidence Act.C. 18(1976) 4 S. In Sardul Singh v.

State of Gujarat. 19Sarwan Singh and Ors. State(NCT.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - care and the Court was satisfied that the evidence of the interested witness have a ring of truth such evidence could be relied upon even without corroboration. ought to be the guiding factor and if so. 21. A. 102 (16th ed. Mallan brother of victim. in the event the evidence is otherwise acceptable. medical. According to Chief JusticeMonir the credit to be given to the statement of witness is a matter not regulated by the rules of procedure. there is no justifiable reason to reject the same.v.22  2. Universal Law Publishing Co. 22Id ¶ 13. The evidence must inspire confidence and in the event of unshaken credibility. Ballan is credible:  Although there is no statutory provision which prescribe methods to gauge the credibility of an eye-witness. question of raising an eye-brow on the reliability of witness being an interested witness would be futile.C. according to this court. 158.23The same has been done in the instant case FIR was recorded on the basis of the statement given by Ballan in 3D Hospital the incident took place at around 11:30 pm and at around 12:35am.C. and consistency with each other. The test of creditworthiness or acceptability. that reliability of a witness could not be questioned on the ground that he was an interested witness in the event the evidence was otherwise acceptable. (1976) 4 S. ¶ 10. (2011) 10 S. 5 . It is on this score the issue of interested witness thus stands negated.C. 212003 S. (Cri) 165: (2003) 1 S. 23TakdirSamsuddin Sheikh v.C. 369. reference can be made to various case laws before this court to get the idea as to how this court has dealt with the issue of credibility in past. (2) his ability.19 2. FIR was lodged promptly:  FIR is lodged promptly then according to this court there remains no time for any kind of manipulation. 2013). consistent statement and other collateral circumstance. Delhi)21.State of Punjab. the conformity of his testimony with FIR.3.S.Law of Evidence.20  It was decided by this court in its decision of Alamgir v. 201 Chief Justice Monir.I Harpal Singh got an information from constable Dinesh (ballet No.C.1 The following elements lend credence to the appellant-prosecution’s story:  A.C.C. there ought not to be any hindrance in the matter of prosecutor's success.3 That the statement of star witness Sh. ¶ 16.1516/E) over telephone at 3D Hospital that Sh.C. In assessing the credibility of any witness the main considerations are (1) his integrity.

I. (Examination in chief and cross examination) In Jayabalanv. 26 (1976 )2S. there can be said to have consistency in his testimony. The informant had no time to concoct a false story.C. his mentioning about injuries suffered by stabbing andthe doctor suggest injuries were perpetrated with a sharp edged weapon.T.I. There was consistency in Sh.C. (2010) 1 S.C. All these facts furnish valuable corroboration. The informant had no time to concoct a false story. the judgment under appeal cannot be interfered with.I.  There was consistency in Sh.”  B. was lodged almost spontaneously within 20 minutes of the occurrence.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - named Lallan Prasad. 6 . Ballan further deposed the same version of statement as he delivered earlier in the 3D Hospital to the police officers. Lallan with multiple stab wounds.R. The evidence of a witness cannot be ignored or thrown out solely because it comes from the mouth of a person who is closely related to the victim. UT of Pondicherry25. The F. post-mortem examination 24 (1976 )2S. Ballan’s statement Tashi was caught by the public. 199.I. 25Jayabalan v.  InJayarajv. Then A. The F. The F. U. So when the prosecution is able to fully corroborate the incident as recorded in the FIR. this court held that the court must be cautious in appreciating and accepting the evidence given by the interested witnesses but the court must not be suspicious of such evidence. The direct evidence of the eye-witnesses received assurance from the medical testimony regarding the nature of the stabbing weapon. was lodged almost spontaneously.R. furnished valuable corroboration. furnished valuable corroboration.I Harpal Singh and Constable Bijender (ballet No. 788. 788. ¶ 23.R. The primary endeavour of the court must be to look for consistency.S.R. Bhallan’s testimony:  Since Sh. Bhallan in the instant case as PW-1 has deposed the same version of statement as he delivered earlier in the 3D Hospital.C. of Pondicherry.  This court in Jayaraj v.C.1772/E) immediately rushed to the hospital wherein they found Sh. State of Tamil Nadu24 said when the F. The relevant portion of the judgment was:  “22.C.State of Tamil Nadu26 the circumstances that the victims was removed to the hospital immediately where they were declared brought dead. ASI Harpal Singh and his team also found at thecrime spot lot of blood strewed.

State of Punjab27. 28Id. the court should insist upon plurality of 27(1976) 1 S. thus the prosecution in this case succeeded in proving its case beyond reasonable doubts and the High Court was quite justified in upholding conviction of the appellant. 29(1957) Cri. was held to be a quite reliable witness.2There is no infirmity in the case of prosecution.28 In the instant case too similar to the facts of the above mentioned case medico legal report prepared by Dr. From these facts. was happened to be consistent (now relate with the facts of the instant case) and his presence at the place of occurrence on the fateful night was not doubted.C.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - was being conducted within one and half hours of the occurrence and first information report being recorded with utmost expedition gone to show that PW. 7 .3. 181. nonexamination of other witnesses.1000. non-recovery of murder weapon will have no bearing upon the prosecution’s case. did not caste its effect on acceptability of his testimony. because:  A. the evidences available on record are sufficient enough to prove the guilt of accused-respondent: (raise only those infirmity which have been dealt with in opponent’s memo)  It is submitted that facts like Sh. ¶ 37. And his further being interested witness. 2.Kamini PW-3 tenders corroboration to the ocular account of Sh. alleged inimical relationship.L. State of Madras29 this court said we have no hesitation in holding that the contention that in a murder case. Ballan. Ballan discloses in his statement stab wounds being suffered by the deceased Mallan and in the medico legal report mentioning of sharp weapon being used and multiple number of stab wounds inflicted throughout the body.J. Single testimony acceptable hence respondent should not be allowed to put premium on non-examination of witness from the public regarding the incident:  In VadiveluThevarv.2 who was solitary eye witness. The medico legal report corroborates the ocular account given by Sh. the medical evidence corroborated the ocular account given by prosecution witness in regard to the nature of the weapons used by the appellants in inflicting injuries on the deceased persons.  C.C. whereby Sh. Ballan:  InLabh Singh v. Ballan being sole eye witness to the incident.

if already overwhelming evidence is available and examination of other witnesses would only be a repetition or duplication of the evidence already adduced.C.C.. Non examination of other witness:  Regarding non-examination of more than one eyewitnesses.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - witnesses.R.C.C. In such a case the court ought to scrutinise the worth of the evidence adduced. and Ors.C. non-examination of such other witnesses may not be material. 145: 2001 S.C. 32 Id.  Also.34 C. that it shall not be necessary for proof or disproof of a fact. 660. 31Id. 1872 provides that no particular number of witnesses is required for proof of any fact.C.  This court in TakhajiHirajiv. 1872 has categorically laid it down that "no particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of any fact.State of U.C. It is trite law that it is not the number of witnesses but it is the quality of evidence which is required to be taken note of by the courts for ascertaining the truth of the allegations made against the accused32.P. 362: (2009) 14S. ¶ 24. Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act. as long ago as 1872. 755. we cannot lose sight of the fact that ghastly acts. is much too broadly stated. Allegation of enmity between the family of Ballan and his cousin Jayesha cannot have any bearing upon the instant case: 30(1997) 6 S. when committed in a public place may very well create a sense of fear and shock in the minds of the witnesses and thus prevent them from coming forward and deposing against the perpetrators of the crime. 8 .Devinder Singh30 said that unless there are other circumstances also to facilitate the drawing of an adverse inference. (Cri) 1070 at page 155. ¶ 21.31  Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act. of the nature and gravity as the present one. the observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Harpal Singhv. (2009)10S. ¶ 19. 34Raj Narain Singh v. it should not be a mechanical process to draw the adverse inference merely on the strength of nonexamination of a witness even if it is material witness." The legislature determined.ThakoreKubersingChamansing33said. to call any particular number of witnesses.  B. presumably after due consideration of the pros and cons. ¶ 20 33(2001) 6 S.C.

but they. cogent and credible.P. 270: (2008) 3 S. ¶.C. there is no reason to discard the same. the version given by the witnesses appears to be clear. The court would be required to analyze the evidence of related witnesses and those witnesses who are inimically disposed towards the accused. The fact that the witnesses did not suffer any injury does not make their evidence untrustworthy. State of Uttar Pradesh35 eye-witness were inimical to the accused. 317. State of Rajasthan37this court held that when the eyewitnesses are stated to be interested and inimically disposed towards the accused. non-recovery of murder weapon does not materially affect the case of the prosecution.C. but it needs to be scrutinized with caution in order to eliminate the possibility of false implication. But if after careful analysis and scrutiny of their evidence. 37(2008) 8 S.  D.I. (Cri) 472 at page 273. were spared. Ram Naik36 the Supreme Court has held that though the strained relations between the complainant and the accused led to groupism yet the evidence of the eye-witnesses cannot be discarded. State of U. 164.  In Dinesh Kumar v. ¶ 9.C. Non recovery of murder weapon:  It is further submitted that the testimony of Sh. The truth or otherwise of the evidence has to be weighed pragmatically. 9 .-Arguments Advanced -Appellants - It is submitted that the evidence of Sh. it has to be noted that it would not be proper to conclude that they would shield the real culprit and rope in innocent persons. 36A.C.C.C. In this regard reference can be made to Nankaunoov. ¶ 12.R. When the accused allegedly fired the shots at the deceased. the eye-witnesses were few steps behind the deceased.C. (use only when such contention is to be given by the opponent)  In SurendraPratapChauhanv.38where the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the courts below failed to take note of the fact that the alleged weapon “country-made pistol” was never recovered by the investigating officer and in the absence of any clear connection between 35A. 2010 S. 38(2016) 3 S.20 to 23. Ballan is unimpeachable which is amply corroborated by the medical evidence reading this in the lights of the facts of the instant case.R.C. 1378.I. though present on the scene of occurrence. In Dharamveerv. 2001 S. Ballan cannot be rejected only the ground that enmity exists between the parties. Conviction can be made on the basis of such evidence..

But according to this court..-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - the weapon used for crime and ballistic report and resultant injury. 41Id.C.C. (Cri) 427. 42¶ 3 of the moot problem.C.C. 759 ¶ 28. ¶ 29. 40(2013) 4 S. non-recovery of “country-made pistol” does not materially affect the case of the prosecution.C mentioned of the existence of enmity with Ballan and his family has been accepted by them. in the light of unimpeachable oral evidence which is amply corroborated by the medical evidence.  Thus lapses such as failure to produce murder weapon and non-examination of other witnesses won’t dislodge the substratum of the prosecution’s case and hence accusedrespondent cannot put premium on the so-called depreciable conduct of the respondents39. (2010) 7 S.C. the evidence on record bears out the case of the prosecution and the evidence is of sterling quality.43 Thus the existence of evil intent or motive to harm Lallan and his family by the accused-respondents cannot be disputed. They can be ignored only if despite their existence.C. it would shake the confidence of the people not merely in the law enforcing agency but also in the administration of justice. State of Jharkhand. State of U.C. the prosecution cannot be said to have established the guilt of the appellant.41  2. Story of the prosecution is to be examined dehors such omission by the investigating agency. Page 434. If the lapses or irregularities do not go to the root of the matter. 10 . if they do not dislodge the substratum of the prosecution case. (2013) 4 S.P. Though Proof of the existence of a motive is not necessary for a conviction of any offence but where the motive is proved it 39Sunil Kundu v. In a case of this nature.42 And the statements of the accused persons under Section 313 Cr. It is a settled principle of law that the statement made by the accused under Section 313 of the Cr. Otherwise. ¶ 29. can be used by the Court to the extent that it is in line with the case of the prosecution. any omission on the part of the investigating officer cannot go against the prosecution case.4 That respondents had evil intention thus they had motive to commit crime:  It is submitted that PW-1 Ballan’s testimony suggests that his cousins developed inimical relations with him and his brother after the property dispute case was decided in favour of the former.P. they can be ignored. 422.  InSunil Kunduv.C.C. 43Dharnidhar v.40this Court has laid down that the lapses or irregularities in the investigation could be ignored subject to a rider.P. State of Jharkhand. 422: (2013) 2 S.

44 (Deal in detail)  2.46  In State v. therefore adverse inference can be drawn against them.C. State of Bihar.C.non-suggestion by the defence that they were not present at the place of the incident and did not participate therein led the court to draw adverse inference against them.ThakoreKubersingChamansing45. it is submitted that since all the accused persons except Tashi managed to disappeared from the crime scene.C. But.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - is evidence of the evil intent and is also relevant to show that the person had the motive to commit actually committed it. (Cri) 1070.OnLine Raj 71. as here.with regard to disappearance of accused in such circumstances a divisional bench of Rajasthan High Court observed thatthe disappearance of the accused after the commission of the alleged crime is a circumstance. accepting the fact that such evidence would not ordinarily be sufficient. 45(2001) 6 S. there is other evidence to connect the accused with the crime. ¶ 19.C. in the absence of any plausible explanation.Jawan Singh47. absconding is a useful piece of corroborative evidence and facts tending to explain the fact of absconding would be relevant under Section 9 of the Evidence Act: vide illustration (c) to Section 9 of the Act. 44Prem Kumar v. ¶ 37.  InTakhajiHirajiv. 145: 2001 S.C.C. With regard to absconding of all of the accused. it can be safely inferred that accused were absconding and the accused have not been able to probabilise their defence. where. in the absence of any plausible explanation. We are in agreement with the reasoning of learned Counsel for the appellant that mere by itself cannot form the basis of conviction. Under section 8 of Indian Evidence Act any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact. may go against the appellant. 11 . Page 155. the court said non-examination of other witnesses does not cast any infirmity in the prosecution case. ¶ 5. 471971 S. (1995) 3 S. 46Id. 228. which.5 That the subsequent conduct of the respondents after the commission of crime can be used against them: (add here tashi’s being caught part of the same transaction)  Disappearance of the accused or attempt to flee from the crime scene after the commission of the alleged crime is a circumstance.C. goes against the appellant. Finding further the eyewitnesses consistent and reliable in their narration of the incident. which.C.

(Cri) 8 12 .1 Respondents did not avail the opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing against him neither did they put forward any defence:  It is humbly submitted that when the accused-appellants made their statement under section 313 of Cr.-Arguments Advanced -Appellants - 2.C. the accused. Both are public duties of the judge. 50(2012) 13 S.C.51In ZahiraHabibullah Sheikh and Anr.C.C. then consequences in law must follow. according to this court.C. State of Chhattisgarh48. 51Id page 227. 1872. 213.C. but also that a guilty man does not escape. The Courts do not merely discharge the function to ensure that no innocent man is punished. it necessitates the inference that appellants were not present except Tashi. State of Gujarat52.   2. then only it can be said that they knew nothing about this event but there was no cogent evidence on record to support their plea. ¶ 34.C. ¶ 52-53.5. but they did not avail this opportunity.P.  In the instant case the trail court had put all material evidence to the accused-respondents under Section 313 Cr.C. State of Assam50 our criminal justice system provides safeguards of fair trial and innocent till proven guilty to an accused. at the time of occurrence. it was for them to prove that they were not present at the place of occurrence and were entitled to the plea of alibi49. to the effect that they had they knew nothing about this event.andthe accused-respondents were given an opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing against themand also to put forward their defence.6 That in criminal justice system we have to ensure a fair trial where the accused and the prosecution both get a fair deal and the guilty man does not escape:  It is submitted that Sahabuddinv. Thus. Then alone can law and order be maintained. the Court underlined the importance of the role of witnesses in a criminal trial and held further that the conducts which illegitimately affect the presentation of evidence in proceedings before the courts 48(2012) 4 S. The burden of proof as to this particular fact lies with appellants by virtue of section 103 of Indian Evidence Act. the society and a fair chance to prove to the prosecution.C. 257. 49 Id.. 52 (2006) 3 S. 374 : (2006) 2 S. there it also contemplates that a criminal trial is meant for doing justice to all. where the accused denied their presence on the spot.v.P.C. On this point reference can be made to this court’s judgment in Ramnareshv.

In thus courts have a vital role to play. therefore. ¶ 6. as noted above. That would be unfair. State of Bihar57 whereby it observed that the maxim falsus in uno.58 53Id.L. 58Id. the duty of the court to scrutinize the evidence carefully and. 1965 S. Merely after considering Ballan’s statement to be concocted and statement of an interested party it rejected his testimony and came to conclusion that prosecution lacks substance without taking notice of the entire facts of the case. falsus in omnibus (false in one thing. it cannot obviously disbelieve the substratum of the prosecution case or the material parts of the evidence and reconstruct a story of its own out of the rest. 13 .J.56  In this regard it is important to refer to this court’s decision in UgarAhir v. 398. 54 This court in case of ShyamalGhoshv.Law of Evidence. 57A.7 That the high court has failed to take notice of the entire facts of the case:  It is submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has failed to take notice of the entire facts of the case and thus erred in acquitting all the accused-respondents. in terms of the felicitous metaphor. No statement of a witness can be read in part and/or in isolation. 103 (16th ed. On the contrary. to the needs of the society. as the interest of the individual accused. Public interest in the proper administration of justice must be given as much importance. ¶ 42.I. L. efforts should be to ensure a fair trial where the accused and the prosecution both get a fair deal. p.J.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - have to be seriously and sternly dealt with. It is. 256. 3837. But. Universal Law Publishing Co. 56Id ¶ 34. Hardly one comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain a grain of untruth or at any rate exaggerations.R.C. A single circumstance cannot be taken to be decisive or determinative for judging the credibility or otherwise of a witness but the cumulative effect of all the circumstances has to be considered. State of West Bengal55 said that the court should examine the statement of a witness in its entirety and read the said statement along with the statement of other witnesses in order to arrive at a rationale conclusion. 55(2012) Cr. embroideries or embellishments. separate the grain from the chaff. false in everything) is neither a sound rule of law nor a rule of practice. if not more. There should not be any undue anxiety to only protect the interest of the accused.53  2. 541 Chief Justice Monir. 277: (1965) 1 Cri. 2013).

59while examining the reasoning of a division bench of High Court where it had interfered with the conviction imposed by the Trial Court. 14 .  59(2014) 4 S.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - 2. ¶ 28. ¶ 27.8. it is our benign submission that High Court has clearly erred in reversing the order of conviction recorded by the trial Court which consequentlyresulted in grave miscarriage of justice. 61Id. we request this court to allow this appeal and set aside the judgment and order of the High Court and restore the judgment and decision of the trial Court. has chosen to interfere with the conviction imposed by the Trial Court in a light hearted manner.C.60  It further found that the eye-witnesses account of the concerned witnesses were all convincing and were corroborative in every minute aspect of the occurrence. Accordingly. Chandagiram. 596. Thus it found that the High Court had miserably failed to carry out the said exercise and without assigning reasons.C.  In view of the aforesaid discussion. That examination of the evidence ought to have been done carefully by the High Court and cogent and convincing reasons have to be given by the court before terming Ballan’s statement “unacceptable” and interfering with the conviction:  It is submitted that in the case of Rajasthan v. facts and circumstances of the case. much less convincing reasons. This court also found that their version was natural and “there was nothing to suspect their version in narrating the occurrence”61. this court said High Court ought to have examined the evidence meticulously and expressed cogent and convincing reasons as to why the detailed consideration of the evidence did not inspire confidence in order to interfere with the conclusion of the Trial Court. 60Id.

63A.2. the court opined that under section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.  3. All these fact clearly lead us to show that there was indeed an intention to cause death of the deceased. 1.C. 1860 according to which culpable homicide is murder if it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any 62A.2 The injury so inflicted was sufficient to cause death of the deceased:  The appellants respectfully submits that in the case at hand there was mensrea and the injuries inflicted upon the deceased by all of the accused were sufficient to cause death within clause (iii) to section 300 of the Indian Penal Code.1 There was mensrea and the injury was sufficient to cause death:  3.R. they all dragged the deceased into a small gali where Jeysha started stabbing him. 1854. in Barendra Kumar Josh v. all are equally liable for acts done in furtherance of common intention so in the case at hand there is no iota of doubt regarding all of the accused being charged under 302 of the Indian Penal Code.1 There was an intention to cause death of the deceased and the injury so inflicted was done in furtherance of a common intention:  The appellants humbly submits that in the present case the injury inflicted upon the deceased was done with an intention and all the acts were done in furtherance of a common intention which was to killLallan. THAT THE RESPONDENTS BE GIVEN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants -  3.I. 1860.C.1. but whether he intended to inflict the injury in question and once the existence of the injury is proved the intention is there or not is one of fact and not one of law.”  In the present case. 15 . King Emperor63.  Also. State of Andhra Pradesh62has opined that “the question so far as the intention is concerned. 2008 S. 1925 P. 1860.  With regard to presence of intention the court in the case of BavisettiKameshwaraRao @Babai v. the deceased. it is not whether he intended to inflict an injury of a particular degree of seriousness.I.R.  3. at first only Jeysha and his friend Tashi engaged into a fight with the deceased but soon all four brothers of Jeysha also got involved into it and it was only after Jeysha instructed them by saying “Iskakaamkhatamkar do”.

Stab wounds directed towards both the kidneys were 5 cm deep. “the question of sentence in a case of murder has almost always presented to Courts a certain amount of difficulty and while Judges ought to administer the law as they find it and not as they wish it to be. be safely said that the total number of injuries that were inflicted upon the deceased were sufficient and in fact. a total of 21 bodily injuries were present on the victim and out of those 21 several were stab wounds directed towards vital organs like.  It is our submission that the present calls for the imposition of extreme sentence of death to all of the accused because of the extreme brutality involved in it and the cruel execution of the offence. the injury in itself would reveal that when the screw driver was plucked with savage force into the vital part of the body with it. The wound directed towards liver was 15 cm deep and another wound directed towards the large intestine was 10 cm deep.R.I. 1957 Bom 226. which clearly demonstrates that this was a case.  3. a chief medical officer.”  As per the medico legal report attached.I. 2008 S.R. A. one must not hesitate to impose the extreme penalty of law. State of Andhra Pradesh 64 has held that in a case where there was 12cm deep injury by the use of screw driver directed towards the liver and spleen of the deceased.” In the under mentioned Pakistan 64A. 16 . A sentence of death is justified in the present case. is in itself sufficient to cause death of the deceased.C.  It can therefore.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.  As stated by their Lordships of the Bombay High Court 65. within clause (iii) to section 300 of the Indian Penal Code. 65State v. as is present in the case at hand. “where the act was done with the intention of causing bodily injury and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death’ covered by “Thirdly” of section 300 of the Indian Penal Code. a 15 cm deep injury directed towards the liver. large intestine and even both the kidneys.2. Shankar SakharamJadhav and another. liver. as was also deposed by the PW-3. it cut his liver and spleen.  The apex court in BavisettiKameshwaraRao @ Babai v. 1854.

the Courts are expected to impose an appropriate and adequate punishment so as to respond to the society’s need for justice against such criminals. The Indian Penal Code. On the other hand. Nagpur 2006).67  In cases involving killing of a human being.C.P.C. it was observed that leniency in the matter of punishment of cases in which the accused deserves a capital punishment will be a dereliction of duty on the part of the Judge to whom the State has entrusted the duty of doing justice between man and man. 673 (4thed. Crown. It may also be remembered that the dread of punishment of death acts as a restraint on many ill-tempered persons from taking human life on slight provocation. 1172. 1860 (sentence of death and sentence of life imprisonment). State of U. they refer to the crime.All India Reporter Pvt. In so far as aggravating circumstances are concerned. 673 Manohar and Chitaley. 68(1973) 1 S. the court is principally concerned with the aggravating or mitigating circumstances connected with the “particular crime under inquiry”. Ltd. were completely in their senses when the crime was committed. In so far as mitigating circumstances are concerned. It is justified on the part of the Courts to keep in view of the rights of the accused while awarding him punishment but while doing so.  In recent years crimes in India are on rise so.J.68 the Supreme Court laid down that discretion in the matter of sentencing is to be exercised by the Judge after balancing all the aggravating and mitigating circumstances “of the crime”.  3. Also. they refer to the criminal.2. the Courts should not be so insensitive because the decision given by the Courts in such cases has the potential to act as a deterrent for the commission of like offences by others. 20.L.1 The aggravating and mitigating circumstances are required to be taken into consideration while applying the doctrine of “rarest of rare” cases:  In Jagmohan Singh v. It also laid down that while choosing between the two alternative sentences provided in Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - case66. it has been 66Khairdi Khan v. the imposition of such inadequate punishment by the Courts may at times encourage criminals. 17 .  The facts of the case at hand show that the accused were not under influence of any intoxicant and in fact. it should not outweigh the rights of the victim of the crime and the society at large. (1951) 52 Cri . Neither had they acted under the duress or domination of another person.

1. 18 . State of W. (2010) 9 S.  This has two pointers viz.  3.70 69Shankar KishanraoKhade v.I. 1. State of Punjab. State of Karnataka. 220. Also. Atbir v. High Court of Karnataka and Another. one of the accused. (2012) 9 S.P.Shivu and Another v. Vikram Singh and Others v. 2007 S. The medico legal report also suggests that the offence was committed outrageously and involved inhumane treatment and torture to the victim.. when he started shouting all of the accused started running away which only shows their deliberate intention to kill Lallan.B.C.C. of Delhi.C.  These facts clearly lead us to show that the aggravating circumstances in the present case clearly outweigh the mitigating circumstance hence justifying the need of awarding of death sentence.C.R. 713.C.C.C. DhananjoyChatterjee v.C. Normally in cases where murder is committed of a large number of persons or by more than one person in a brutal and systematic manner.C. (1999) 5 S.C. 70SwamyShraddananda v. Ajmal Amir Kasab alias Abu Mujahid v. 56.Hence.C. State of Maharshtra. The sole motive behind the commission of the offence was revenge. State of M.C. Jai Kumar v.  On the other hand. (1994) 2 S. According to the statement given by Ballan.C. (2007) 4 S. (2010) 3 S.C.2.T.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - held in plethora of cases69 that although the age of the accused is a relevant consideration but it is not a determinative factor by itself.2 Nature of crime is also an important factor while deciding between awarding death sentence or life imprisonment. State of Maharashtra.. all the evidences point towards the guilty intention of all of the accused. was it a case of diabolical murder and was there any planning preceding commission of murder. Registrar General. Also. the offence was committed near Budh Bazar Road which is a public place and the offence has the tendency to create a fear psychosis in the public at large and also has the capacity to shock the conscience of the society at large. Government of N. 2531. 546. the fact that Jeysha. (2013) 5 S. deliberately took the knife and threw it into the river Ghaggar near Ambala establishes the mensrea which in a murder case is an essential ingredient. in the present case going by the facts it is absolutely clear the there are no mitigating circumstances present.C.A. 1. death sentence is upheld.C. Mohd.

The Indian Penal Code. Also. 2006).C.C.C.C. State of Punjab76. the fact that since the Hon’ble High Court has acquitted all of the accused is no defense. and vindictive character72 or where the murder is committed for lust or greed73.71  A sentence of death will be proper where the case is one of cold blooded.C. 56. The Courts must keep in view the nature of the crime. State (Delhi Admin.)78. State of Maharashtra. helpless state of victim. the brutality with which it was executed and. 77(1983) 3 S. N. State. 76(1980) 2 S. horrendous features of the crime.C.C. 672 (4thed. All the five persons first engaged in a fight with the deceased and then dragged him into a small gali and started stabbing him.C. the death sentence may be the most appropriate punishment for such a ghastly crime”. A.R.T.R. 609. 1975 S. having regard to the weapon used and the manner of their use. State of Punjab. 19 . State of Punjab77. 470. 75(2011) 12 S.C.A.C. One such principle is the nature of the crime. as mere acquittal or lesser sentence imposed by the lower court is not a mitigating factor. and Kehar Singh v. the facts clearly depict the plight of the victim and the extreme brutality with which he was murdered.I. A. callous. All India Reporter Pvt. “Where an accused does not act on any spur-of-the-moment provocation and indulges himself in a deliberately planned crime and meticulously executes it. 886. 74In Haresh Mohandas Rajput v. 78(1988) 3 S. First all five of the accused started fighting with him and then they dragged him to a gali and started stabbing him. 783.R. The medico legal report 71Devender Pal Singh v. Ltd. 72BishanDass v.C. 74Suresh v. Nagpur. In the case at hand. Where the murder committed is cold blooded. 1975 S.  The main point to be given consideration with regard to awarding punishment of death is whether the case falls under the category of “rarest of rare” as decided by the Hon’ble Supreme court in the cases of Bacchan Singh v. 573.  In the case at hand. 733 Manohar and Chitaley.C. 2003 S. death sentence would be warranted if murder is diabolically conceived and cruelly executed. Macchi Singh v. gruesome and heinous.I.I.-Arguments Advanced -Appellants - Also. 684. the facts clearly state that the murder was indeed a cold blooded. in the absence of and extenuating circumstances punishment of death is an appropriate one. of Delhi and Another. it is rarest of rare case justifying extreme sentence of death. State of Maharashtra75 the apex court opined that.

A.R. 2.Also. 80Mohd. IS NOT ADEQUATE HENCE THE SAME HAS TO BE ENHANCED. the Hon’ble Supreme Court has to enhance the compensation amount to Rs. 1973.  Although in the instant no amount of compensation can be adequate nor it can be of any respite to the victim-parents of the deceased Lallan. rehabilitation becomes a must in each and every case.   4. 1983 S. 252.00. 10.P. In the instant case the Hon’ble Supreme Court has to take adequate compensatory measures to ensure rehabilitation. THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AWARDED BY THE TRIAL COURT UNDER SECTION 357A OF CR.80  The parent’s claim for compensation is undisputed because the scheme under section 357A of Cr.as awarded was not sufficient enough to provide any solace to the victim-parents of the deceased Lallan. state is dutybound to provide compensation which may help in victim’s rehabilitation. 1973. The manner in which the offence has been committed makes the case to fall under the category of rarest of rare case thereby justifying the extreme penalty of sentence of death. is made applicable to the victims irrespective of the outcome of 79Machhi Singh v.C.C. the initial amount of compensation ofRs. the facts of the case also show that when A.  Death sentence must be imposed only when life imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequate punishment having regard to the relevant circumstances of the crime 79 which is exactly the situation in the present case so death sentence should be awarded to all of the accused.000/because the rehabilitation of the victim is of paramount importance..C.00.I. Para 124. The mental trauma that the victim suffers due to the commission of such heinous crime.C. 20 . Union of India. in the instant case. 957. State of Punjab.000/.I Harpal Singh and his team went to the crime spot they found a lot of blood strewed over the road which only goes to prove the brutal nature of the offence and the cruelty with which it was executed..P.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - clearly depicts the brutality and cruelty in the execution of the crime and the helpless state of the victim and also the savage force with which the knife was plucked into the vital parts of the body.S. (2014) 5 S.Haroon v.C.

1973. SanyamLodha. even when the State fails to identify the accused or fails to collect and present acceptable evidence to punish the guilty.. There are systemic or other failures responsible for crime remaining unpunished which need to be addressed by improvement in quality and integrity of those who deal with investigation and prosecution. Victim expects a mechanism for rehabilitative measures. Lexis Nexis. the duty to give compensation remains.C. (2011) 13 S. 2015). 952.P. the scenario in present case also strengthens such demand because the amount spent by the parents for the upbringing of the victim need to be taken into account.000 is not adequate for rehabilitation of the old parents of the deceased victim.C. 834 Sohoni’s.V.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - the prosecution. who have suffered loss or injury as a result of crime and who require rehabilitation83.1003 (21st Ed. The compensation amount of Rs. including monetary compensation.OnLine S.C.v.C. 262. 21 . Kelkar. where. State of Haryana. ¶ 12. thus compensation amount has to be enhanced. 84 The loss caused in the instant case was unrecoverable. should also be proportionate to the harm suffered.00.81 In a case before the Hon’ble Supreme Court it was held that. apart from improvement of infrastructure but punishment of guilty is not the only step in providing justice to victim. therefore the degree of compensatory measure to be taken under section 357A of Cr.C. 1973 is called “victim compensation scheme” and the purpose of this section is to provide compensation to the victim or his dependent. Criminal Procedure 639 (6th ed. 82Suresh and Anr.C..C. Eastern Book Company2014).P.  The quantum of compensation under section 357A of Cr. 84State of Rajasthan v.82  This entire scheme of compensation under section 357A of Cr.. Victim of a crime or his kith and kin have legitimate expectation that the State will punish the guilty and compensate the victim. it was observed that the Section 357A empowers the Court to direct the State to pay compensation to the victim in cases where the compensation awarded Under Section 357 is not adequate for such rehabilitation. But the compensation amount so granted should be reasonable enough to meet the immediate need of coming out of the trauma/catastrophe.P. Such compensation has been directed to be paid in public law remedy with reference to Article.C. 2. depends upon the facts of each case. 1973. or where the case ends in acquittal or discharge and the victim has to 81R. Code of Criminal Procedure. In this regard reference can be made to a case decided by the Delhi High Court. 2015 S.

2014 S.State. 22 .  85Ghanshyam @Bittuv.OnLine Del 4720.C.85 Hence in view of the aforesaid discussion the compensation amount should be enhanced.-Arguments Advanced- -Appellants - be rehabilitated.C.

  ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED   Sd/- ON BEHALF OF STATE (NCT OF DELHI)  13 COUNSELS FOR THE APPELLANT . 10. THE IMPUIGNED JUDGMENT OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT SHOULD BE QUASHED ON THE GROUND THAT THE ACQUITTAL OF RESPONDENTS RESULTED IN GRAVE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. JUSTICE AND GOOD CONSCIENCE.C. IS NOT ADEQUATE HENCE THE SAME SHOULD BE ENHANCED TO RS. BALLAN IS CREDIBLE AND THE GUILT OF THE RESPONDENTS WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE APPELLANT-PROSECUTION BEYOND ALL THE REASONABLE DOUBTS AND THEREFORE THE RESPONDENTS BE GIVEN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.000/-. THE STATEMENT OF SH. B..  AND ANY OTHER RELIEF THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO GRANT IN THE INTERESTS OF EQUITY.P. THE APPELLANTS HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT THE HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ADJUDGE AND DECLARE THAT:  A. THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AWARDED BY THE TRIAL COURT UNDER SECTION 357A OF Cr.-Prayer- -Appellants  PRAYER   IN THE LIGHT OF ARGUMENTS ADVANCED AND AUTHORITIES CITED. C. 1973.00.