Hareram Chaudhary's life sentence for murder confirmed based on robust evidence despite alleged procedural delays.
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has upheld the conviction of Hareram Chaudhary, confirming the life sentence handed down by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barabanki, for the murder of Thakur Ram Sahai Singh. The case, rooted in the cold-blooded murder committed within the Purushottam Dham Ashram, saw Chaudhary being found guilty of shooting Singh, the Head Secretary of the Thakur Sadanand Tatvagyan Parishad, in a meticulously planned attack in May 2015.
The judgment, delivered by Justices Rajnish Kumar and Zafeer Ahmad, detailed the corroborative evidence presented by the prosecution, which included consistent eyewitness testimonies, medical reports confirming firearm injuries, and the recovery of the weapon. Despite the defense’s arguments highlighting procedural lapses such as the delay in filing the First Information Report (FIR), the court was satisfied with the explanations provided, attributing the delay to fear and confusion among the witnesses.
The court emphasized that minor discrepancies in eyewitness accounts did not undermine their credibility, as the core details remained consistent. It further noted that the testimonies of key witnesses, P.W.-1 Suryakant Mani and P.W.-2 Bandhu Ji, were reliable and supported by the post-mortem findings. The recovery of a country-made pistol, following a disclosure by the accused, further bolstered the prosecution's case.
Chaudhary’s defense, which hinged on questioning the motive and the credibility of evidence due to the alleged delay in FIR and purported manipulation by the police, was systematically dismantled by the prosecution. The court highlighted that the presence of direct evidence, such as eyewitness accounts, diminishes the necessity of proving motive to the same degree as circumstantial cases.
The defense’s attempt to discredit the prosecution by arguing that other accused were not charged was also rejected. The High Court underscored that the conviction was based on substantial evidence against Chaudhary, independent of the involvement of others initially named.
In affirming the trial court's decision, the High Court ruling reaffirms the judicial principle that procedural delays, when credibly explained, do not necessarily invalidate a criminal case, particularly when supported by solid evidence.
Bottom line:-
Conviction under Section 302 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act upheld based on corroborative evidence, including eyewitness testimonies, medical reports, and recovery of the weapon. Delay in FIR lodging sufficiently explained due to fear and confusion among witnesses.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 313, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27, Arms Act, Section 3/25
Hareram Chaudhary v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc id # 2907772
