TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Indian Penal Code. Appellant Yadav has independently been convicted under section 302 of the Code and has been sentenced to death. He has also been convicted under section 3 of the Explosive Substance Act and has been sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment. Two other accused persons who had been put on trial along with the appellants were acquitted by the trial court and their acquittal has become final. Mahesh Narain Prasad Sharma, the victim, was a Member of the Indian Administrative Service and was posted as Collector and District Magistrate of Gopalganj District in the State of Bihar on the 11th of April, 1983 Mahesh Narain went to his court to work in the morning and after he finished his work, both he and his brother, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o his guilt. Special leave, so far as he is concerned, is limited to the question of sentence. We have, therefore, heard learned counsel for Yadav on the question of sentence and see no justification to take a view different from what has been said about him by the High Court. His appeal, therefore, is dismissed and his conviction as also sentence as awarded by the trial court and confirmed by the High Court shall stand. We shall now deal with the appeal filed by Sadanand Tripathi. Sadanand came from a poor family and started his career as a Bus Conductor. While in employment, he obtained the Degree in Law and started practice as a lawyer in Uttar Pradesh for some time. Thereafter, he started giving religious discourses and styled himself a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om th July, 1982 Sadanand had continuously been detained in jail till the Collector's murder on 11.4.1983. In view of this fact, the prosecution has relied upon the allegation of conspiracy, confession and other features to establish the complicity of Sadanand in the murder of the Collector. There are two confessions--a judicial confession before a Magistrate, being Exhibit 44 and the other is extra judicial confession. Dealing with Exhibit 44, the High Court has observed: So far as the confession before the Magistrate, Exhibit 44, is concerned, the trial court has itself, hesitatingly, accepted the same. From the confession I find that it was in the nature of the cross-examination which is not permissible under the law and has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Collector under the orders of Baba ................ P.W. 11 stated: On being caught hold of, he was assaulted with slaps, fists and asked as to why he did so. On being asked, the said person replied that he had hit the Collector by bomb at the orders of Guru. Several other witnesses have also spoken in the same trend about Yadav being assaulted by the angry mob soon after his apprehension. It is a fact that a set of witnesses who, according to the prosecution, were present when Yadav was taken into custody following the incident, have not spoken about any confession. They are P.Ws. 5, 12, 15, 40 and 57. In his own statement recorded under section 164 of the Code on 13.4.1983, Yadav denied to have made any statement follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts opinion with regard to the quality and effect of the said evidence, then it is permissible to turn to the confession in order to receive assurance to the conclusion of guilt which the judicial mind is about to reach on the said other evidence. ........... that the confession of a co-accused person cannot be treated as substantive evidence and can be pressed into service only when the court is inclined to accept other evidence and feels the necessity of seeking for an assurance in support of its conclusion deducible from the said evidence . It is now to be found out if apart from the confession there is any substantive evidence from which the prosecution can have support for its case. According to the prosecution, Yadav was stayi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regular flow of food from outside. Jail officials were also entertained by Sadanand. This type of evidence, even if accepted, does not establish conspiracy because Yadav, being a follower, was likely in the usual course to meet Sadanand and the fact that they were meeting at regular intervals by itself would not establish conspiracy. Prosecution relied on an event of 11th April, 1983 by examining P.W.4. This witness who was a convict staying in the same jail stated that his wife had an interview with him in the jail by paying bribe of ₹ 2 or ₹ 3 on 11.4.1983. While he was talking to his wife, he saw accused Yadav talking to Sadanand. He over-heard Yadav telling Tripathi that his work would be done within an hour or so. Sadanand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
