Gauhati High Court Overturns Trial Court's Discharge Order, Orders Framing of Additional Charges in Tezu Mob Lynching Case

The court directs trial court to include charges of conspiracy, obstruction, and murder after reviewing significant evidence against respondents.

In a significant judgment, the Gauhati High Court has overturned a previous order by the trial court in the Tezu mob lynching case, directing the framing of additional charges against the respondents. The court found substantial evidence indicating the involvement of the accused in the lynching of two undertrial prisoners (UTPs) and the vandalism of the Tezu police station. The High Court's decision mandates the trial court to frame charges under Sections 120(B), 452, 353, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), in addition to the already framed charges of rioting and unlawful assembly.

The case dates back to February 19, 2018, when a mob of around a thousand people stormed Tezu police station, overpowered the police, and lynched two accused of a heinous crime. This incident was initially registered under several sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. However, the trial court had discharged the respondents of the more severe charges, a decision that the State contested in this criminal petition.

Justice Pranjal Das, presiding over the case, thoroughly reviewed the charge sheet and the evidence, including eyewitness testimonies and call data records (CDR), which pointed to the respondents' involvement in the unlawful assembly and the subsequent lynching. The High Court emphasized the 'grave suspicion test,' asserting that the evidence presented met this criterion, warranting a trial on the more severe charges.

The judgment also referenced established legal principles, noting that while framing charges, the trial court is not required to delve into detailed reasoning, unlike an order of discharge, which mandates a comprehensive explanation. The High Court highlighted that the materials available created significant suspicion of the respondents' active participation in the conspiracy and obstruction of police duties, alongside the lynching.

The decision underscores the importance of a thorough judicial process in cases involving mob violence and seeks to ensure that justice is pursued for the victims of the Tezu incident. The High Court's directive is expected to reshape the trial proceedings, providing the prosecution an opportunity to present its case on the newly framed charges.

Bottom Line:

Framing of charges under Section 227 CrPC - Grave suspicion test satisfied - Trial court justified in framing charges under Section 120(B)/452/353/302 IPC based on materials revealed by investigation indicating prima facie involvement of accused in unlawful assembly, vandalism, obstruction of police duty, and lynching of UTPs.

Statutory provision(s): Sections 227, 228 CrPC, Sections 120(B), 452, 353, 302, 149 IPC.

State of AP v. Legam Takaliang, (Gauhati) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2807918