In a recent legal case, union office bearers accused in a mob attack were acquitted by the High Court. The court’s decision was based on a thorough legal analysis of the evidence presented. Lack of concrete evidence showing direct involvement in the attack or causing injury led to the acquittal of the accused. This case highlights the importance of evidence and legal analysis in criminal proceedings.
Facts
- The appellants were convicted for offences under Sections 302/392/148/323/149 IPC.
- They were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.
- The Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court confirmed their conviction and dismissed the appeal.
- Thirteen accused, including the appellants, were convicted by the High Court for various offenses.
- Appellants were the President and Secretary of the Union at the relevant time.
- Appellants and 70 co-accused were tried for the murder of Rupak Kumar Gogoi, the Managing Director of the Company they were working in.
- The present appeal is for the remaining accused Chaitu Gowala and Ajay Ahari.
- Six accused initially filed the appeal/special leave petition, but only two appellants remain after the dismissal of the petition for the others.
- Eye witnesses PW3, PW4, and PW6 identified the appellants and other accused during the trial.
Also Read: Challenging Legal Presumptions in Negotiable Instrument Cases
Arguments
- The appellants attempted to control the situation, but the mob attacked the deceased – Managing Director who later succumbed to the injuries.
- The counsel for the accused argued that there is no evidence linking the appellants to causing injury to the deceased or participating in the offenses they are convicted for.
- It is contended that there is no proof that the appellants instigated the mob violence.
- The appellants, as office bearers of the Union, were present when the incident occurred during negotiations with the laborers.
- Even based on the eyewitness testimonies, it cannot be conclusively stated that the appellants committed the offenses they are convicted of, especially under Section 302 IPC.
- Learned counsel for the State argues that the appellants, who were office bearers, came out and spoke something in their own language when the mob arrived.
- Based on the deposition of eye witnesses PW3, PW4, and PW6, it is established that the appellants were involved in the incident.
- The appellants are rightly convicted under Section 149 IPC for their role in the events.
Also Read: Legal Analysis of Admission Irregularities in Educational Institutions
Analysis
- The appellants were present as office bearers of the Union during the incident.
- No evidence suggests the appellants caused any injury to the deceased or participated in the offences they are convicted for.
- The appellant Chaitu Gowala said something to the labourers which agitated them, but the exact words were not recorded.
- Chaitu Gowala and another appellant directed the labourers to go to the place where their dues would be distributed.
- Disputes over wages and non-acceptance of partial dues led to the labourers protesting and shouting.
- The deceased questioned Chaitu Gowala about the snatching of a weapon from a public servant, leading to a heated situation.
- Conviction of appellants Chaitu Gowala and Ajay Ahari deemed unsustainable.
- Lack of concrete evidence showing the appellants’ direct involvement in the attack or causing injury.
- Absence of evidence regarding the words spoken by the appellants or their instigation of others.
- Inability to convict appellants under Section 302 IPC with the aid of Section 149 IPC.
Also Read: Quashing of Enhanced Tuition Fee in Private Medical Colleges
Decision
- The appellants, Chaitu Gowala and Ajay Ahari, have been acquitted of the charges they were tried and convicted for.
- They are to be released immediately unless needed in another case.
- The judgments of both the High Court and the trial Court convicting the appellants for various offences under IPC sections 302, 392, 148, 323, and 149 have been quashed and set aside.
Case Title: CHAITU GOWALA Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM (2022 INSC 937)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000325-000325 / 2020
