Brief Facts
- In this case, the Trial Court held all the accused guilty for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced all the accused to undergo life imprisonment. Allowing the appeal filed by three accused, the High Court acquitted them observing that there are contradictions in the ocular and medical evidence, and therefore the presence of accused persons was doubtful and thus, they are entitled to the benefit of doubt.
- The State filed appeal against this judgment of the High Court.
Issues
- Whether all the accused can be convicted on the basis of the common intention irrespective of the fact whether any of the accused had used any weapon or not or any of them caused any injury or not?
Held
- Appeal Allowed. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that there are no material contradictions between the ocular and medical evidence. The presence of all the accused have been established and proved and the prosecution has also been successful in proving that all the accused shared the common intention thus, the Trial Court judgment was restored.
- Once it has been established and proved by the prosecution that all the accused came at the place of incident with a common intention to kill the deceased and as such, they shared the common intention, in that case it is immaterial whether any of the accused who shared the common intention had used any weapon or not and/or any of them caused any injury on the deceased or not.
Relevant Para No.
- 4.2 & 4.3