Summary
The Court upheld the High Court’s reversal of acquittal of two men for a fatal lathi assault. The deceased’s FIR and dying declaration supported their distinct involvement despite the final acquittal of three others. Conviction for culpable homicide under Section304PartII read with Section34 and five-year rigorous imprisonment was maintained.
Issues
- Whether the two appellants’ involvement could be separated from that of the acquitted coaccused.
- Whether the High Court properly reversed acquittal and applied Section304PartII.
Held
- On the State’s appeal against acquittal, the High Court could assess the evidence and reverse a perverse or unreasonable finding. The deceased’s FIR and dying declaration consistently implicated these two appellants and supported separating their cases from the three finally acquitted coaccused. (¶ 18–21)
- The assault aimed to teach the deceased a lesson over an earlier community dispute. The absence of an intention to kill, absence of an autopsy opinion that the injuries were ordinarily sufficient to cause death, and survival for14days supported the fact-specific conviction under Section304PartII rather than murder. (¶ 22–25)
- The five-year rigorous imprisonment,Rs2,000 fine and three-month simple imprisonment in default for each appellant were upheld. Gaya Prasad’s bail was cancelled with surrender for any remaining sentence; the trial court must verify Pooranlal’s actual custody and issue appropriate orders. (¶¶ 18, 26–28)
Result
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences upheld. Gaya Prasad directed to surrender for any remaining term, and trial court directed to verify Pooranlal’s custody record before consequential orders.