Convictions Overturned Due to Inconsistencies in Witness Testimonies and Lack of Corroborative Evidence
In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has acquitted the remaining accused in a decades-old dacoity case, reversing the convictions handed down by a trial court in 1983. The case pertained to a dacoity incident reported on July 27, 1982, in Badaun district, where several individuals were accused of looting valuables and injuring residents.
The appellate court, led by Justice Avnish Saxena, found substantial inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses and a lack of corroborative evidence to sustain the trial court's conviction. The judgment highlighted the failure of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, noting that the material evidence presented was inadequate to support the charges of dacoity and attempt to cause grievous hurt.
The original trial had convicted seven individuals under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code. However, during the pendency of the appeal, four of the accused passed away, leading to the abatement of the appeal against them. The surviving appellants—Ali Hasan, Harpal, and Latoori—were acquitted as the court found the trial court's judgment to be based on presumptions rather than concrete evidence.
The High Court underscored the importance of scrutinizing the evidence, especially when the accused had vehemently denied the charges from the onset, citing village politics and previous animosities as reasons for their alleged false implication. Witnesses were found to have provided conflicting accounts regarding the number of dacoits, weapons used, and injuries inflicted, which further weakened the prosecution's case.
Citing the Supreme Court's stance in similar cases, the High Court emphasized that an appellate court should not hesitate to overturn a conviction when the evidence fails to meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Consequently, the court set aside the trial court's judgment, granting the benefit of doubt to the accused.
This judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that convictions are based on solid evidence and that the principles of justice are upheld. The case highlights the challenges in prosecuting old cases, where inconsistencies and lack of evidence can lead to the exoneration of accused individuals.
Bottom Line:
Conviction for dacoity and related offences cannot be sustained if there are material inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses, lack of corroborative evidence, and failure of prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Statutory provision(s):
- Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 395 and 397
- Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 374(2)
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Ali Hasan v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2853627
