In the landmark case of Ramraj Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court of India has issued a significant judgment regarding the conviction of Ramraj Singh in connection with the murder of Kaptan Singh and attempted murder of Indal Singh. The case, stemming from a series of violent incidents in Village Bhajai, District Bhind, has raised crucial questions about witness testimonies, the right of private defence, and the reliability of evidence. The judgment sheds light on the complex legal intricacies surrounding the case and sets a precedent for future legal proceedings.
Facts
- Appellant has suffered over 14 years of substantive imprisonment and nearly 22 years with remission.
- Convicted for murder of Kaptan Singh and attempted murder of Indal Singh based on testimonies of eyewitnesses.
- Acquitted for murder of Kalyan Singh due to lack of reliable witness statements.
- Appeal filed against the judgment of the trial court which was upheld by the High Court.
- Appellant sentenced to life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for the two crimes.
- Prayer for premature release pending due to the appeal.
- Both incidents occurred in village Bhajai, District Bhind, Madhya Pradesh on 10 November, 1985.
- The first incident involved a scuffle between a group of people from Patel caste and another group from Prajapati caste.
- During this incident, a bus on the Gwalior-Bhind route was stopped and set on fire.
- In the second incident, a similar group from the Patel caste was involved in a fight with a group from the Scheduled Caste.
- This led to houses being burnt and the murder of two individuals from the Scheduled Caste.
- Several people were injured in these incidents, with some of them requiring hospital treatment.
Also Read: Case Summary: Appellant vs. G.B. Pant Institute of Engineering and Technology
Arguments
- P.H. Parekh, representing the appellant, contended that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated.
- Prosecution witnesses failed to explain the fatal injuries to Chutallu @ Ram Mohan and Shiv Singh, making their evidence untrustworthy.
- Two members of the accused side were killed in the same incident where the deceased Kaptan Singh was killed and Indal Singh was injured, highlighting the lack of clarity in the prosecution’s case.
- In an incident of extensive crossfire, the accused appellant did not sustain any injuries, casting doubt on the reliability of the prosecution witnesses.
- The evidence of Ramraj Singh(PW-14) was not considered by the High Court.
- Raj Kumari(PW-7) and Indal Singh(PW-12) were deemed interested witnesses due to their close relation to the deceased Kaptan Singh, questioning the credibility of their testimony.
- A cross-case against six persons from the complainant side, including Indal Singh(PW-12) and Ramraj Singh(PW-14), resulted in their conviction for the offence under Section 396 IPC, indicating that the members of the complainant party were the aggressors.
- The appellant, being convicted in the cross-case, should be acquitted based on the benefit of doubt and the right of private defence.
- Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant.
Analysis
- The High Court acquitted six persons from the complainant party in the cross case, stating that the accused party were the aggressors.
- Ramraj Singh(PW-14) fired gun shots at Chutallu @ Ram Mohan, causing fatal injuries.
- The evidence of Ramraj Singh(PW-14) was discarded by the High Court.
- Trivial contradictions regarding absence of empty cartridges and plea of alibi were deemed insignificant.
- The prosecution provided a thorough explanation for the injuries received by the accused party.
- The gun shots fired by Ramraj Singh(PW-14) and Indal Singh(PW-12) caused the death of Chutallu @ Ram Mohan and Shiv Singh.
- The Criminal Appeal No 582 of 1998 resulted in the acquittal of all accused persons.
- The incident where Kaptan Singh was killed occurred in front of his house.
- Witnesses Indal Singh(PW-12) and Raj Kumari(PW-7) were deemed trustworthy.
- The allegation of the accused appellant firing gun shots at Kaptan Singh was corroborated by medical evidence.
Also Read: Challenging Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence
Case Title: RAMVIR @ SAKET SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (2024 INSC 308)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-001258-001258 / 2010
