http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9  

PETITIONER: GOPAL & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF TAMIL NADU

DATE OF JUDGMENT30/01/1986

BENCH: RAY, B.C. (J) BENCH: RAY, B.C. (J) ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J)

CITATION:  1986 AIR  702            1986 SCR  (1) 199  1986 SCC  (2)  93        1986 SCALE  (1)132

ACT:      Constitution of  India, 1950,  Article 136  -  Criminal appeal -  Conviction and  sentence - Concurrently arrived at by trial  and Appellate  Courts -  Interference  by  Supreme Court When arises.      Practice and Procedure - Sentence - Question of Supreme Court - When would interfere.

HEADNOTE:      The Mirasdars  used to bring labourers from outside for harvest of  paddy from  their fields as local labourers were reluctant to  harvest paddy at the wage of 4 1/2 measures of paddy. The  local labourers were very much aggrieved by this bringing of  men from  outside for  harvesting of  paddy. On 25th December, 1968 one Packiriswami Pillai, since deceased, alongwith  17   other  labourers   of  Irakkai  village  was returning home  at about 5.30 P.M. after harvesting of crops from the  fields  of  P.W.15.  They  reached  the  east-west Harijan Street  at about  7.30 P.M.  mere was moon light and electric light.  There, P.Ws.  31,32,34 to 44 saw a crowd of 10 to  15 persons  standing. In that crowd P.Ws. 31,32,34 to 37 saw  accused Nos.l  and 2  armed with  aruvals. The crowd questioned them  as to which place they belonged to, whereon they replied  that they belonged to Irakkai. Immediately, A- l, Gopal  cried out  "Do not leave Irakkai people, cut them, beat  them."  P.Ws.  31,32,34  to  37  while  running  found Packiriswami Pillai  tripping  and  falling  down  near  the electric lamp  post on  the Harijan  Street. They  also  saw accused Nos.  1 and  2 and  some others in the crowd lifting the deceased by hands, legs and clothes. Then he was carried to some distance towards the east. At that time Packiriswami Pillai cried  out that  he was  being cut by Gopal (A-l) and they were leaving him behind ant running. P.Ws. 31,32 and 34 to 37 saw the first accused cutting Packiriswami Pillai with aruval on  his neck  and on  his head. P.Ws. 31,32, 34,35,36 and 37  ran towards  the Caste  Hindu Street  and ultimately entered into  the house  of P.W.47.  Another crowd  of 50-60 persons armed with aruvals and sticks came from the 200 south and  they caused  injuries on  the persons of P.Ws. 54 and 55  who came  out of their house. On getting information at about  8.00 P.M.,  P.W.72, the  Head Constable, with some

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9  

S.A.P. men  went to  Keezha Vanmani and after collecting the injured  persons  from  the  house  of  P.W.47  as  well  as collecting the  injured P.W.54 and 55 in the van came to the Keevalur Police  Station where  P.W.79 (Inspector of Police) recorded the  statement of P.W.54 and registered the same as Crime No. 326 of 1968. He thereafter recorded the statements of P.W.55 and P.Ws. 34 to 37 in the Police Station. At about 11.45 P.M.  P.W.79 left  for Keezha  Vanmani and  met P.W.31 there. Then  both of  them went to Nadu Street and found the dead body  of Packiriswami  Pillai with  multiple  injuries. P.W.79 recorded  the statement  of P.W.31 and registered the same as Crime No. 328 of 1968.      Out of  22 accused, the Sessions Judge acquitted 14 and convected 8,  namely, accused  Nos.1,2,12,13,17,18,19 and 20 under various offences and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for  various terms. Te Sessions Judge found the aforesaid accused  guilty of various offences on the grounds (1) that there was electric light and also moon light at the time of  the occurrence  and that  P.Ws. 31,32  and 34 to 37 witnessed the  fatal injuries  caused by aruvals on the head and neck of Packiriswami Pillai by Gopal (A-l); (2) that the crying out  by the  deceased Packiriswami  Pillai that Gopal (A-l) was cutting him was in the nature of Dying Declaration and no  motive could be ascribed for the deceased to falsely implicate the  accused A-l,  Gopal at  that moment; (3) that the  injuries   sustained  by   P.Ws.  34  to  36  with  all probabilities establish  the presence  of these  P.Ws. at  a close range  and seeing  the occurrence;  and (4) that there was also  overwhelming evidence as to the presence of A-l in the crowd.  The appeal  of all  the 8  accused persons filed before the High Court was dismissed.      Dismissing the appeal to this Court, ^      HELD : 1. m ere is no infirmity far less any illegality or failure of justice which would impel the Supreme Court to interfere with  the order  of conviction  and  sentence  con currently arrived at by both the courts below. [210 D]      2(i) P.Ws.  34 to  37  have  clearly  stated  in  their depositions that they witnessed A-l inflict cutting injuries on the  neck and  heat of  Packiriswami Pillai after lifting him along- 201 with other  accused and  carrying him to the east of Harijan Street. The  court of  appeal below  has rightly  held  that P.W. 54 was  only concerned  with the incident that occurred before his  house and,  as such,  in Exhibit  P-11 there was only the  reference to  the said  incident. It was also held that P.W.  79 in  his deposition refuted the suggestion that he did not examine P.W. 34 to 37 at the time alleged by him. Moreover, all these P.Ws. 34 to 37 suffered several injuries being chased  by the  crowd while running forwards the house of P.W.  47. Therefore, evidences of all these eye witnesses as well as of P.W. 31 were believed by both the courts below that A-l caused fatal cut injuries on the person of deceased Packiriswami Pillai. [207 A-C]      2(ii) P.W.  65, Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, who conducted  postmortem also stated in his deposition that out of  the 11  injuries caused  on the  person of  deceased Packiriswami Pillai,  the injuries  Nos. 1 and 2 which could have been  caused by  single  cut  were  sufficient  in  the ordinary course  of nature  to cause  death. The  doctor has also stated  in his  evidence that  after the  infliction of injury No.  1 the  injured could have shouted out. There is, therefore, ample  evidence to  negative the  submission that the accused  No. 1 was falsely implicated. Moreover, P.W. 72

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9  

has stated  in his deposition that he is deaf and as such he could not  hear whether  P.Ws. 34  to 37  stated  about  the injuries caused  by A-1  on deceased Packiriswami Pillai. He also  stated   that  he   heard  P.Ws.  34  to  37  uttering Packiriswami, Packiriswami.  It was rightly held by both the courts below  that P.W.  72 was deaf and could not hear what they told  him. The non-mentioning of attack on Packiriswami Pillai by  P.W. 54 in his statement does not in any way lead to the  inference that the statements of P.Ws. 34 to 37 were recorded after  recording of  the statement of P.W. 31. [207 D-F]      3(i) P.W.  79 recorded  the statement of P.Ws. 34 to 37 in the  Police Station  after recording of the statements of P.Ws. 54  and 55. The mere recording of Statements in plain- sheet instead  of in  diary form in these circumstances does not lead  to any where in view of the clear evidence of P.W. 79 which  was believed  by both  the courts  below that  the statements of  these P.Ws.  were recorded by him immediately after recording  the statement  of P.W.  54 (Exhibit  P-11). [207 H; 208 A]      3(ii) P.Ws.  31,32 and 34 to 37 clearly stated in their evidence that  they did  not see P.W. 1 at all. The evidence of P.W.  1 was  that he  did not go to Caste Hindu Street at that 202 time. In  view of  these evidence, the Court of appeal below held that  the evidence of P.W. 72 to the effect that P.W. 1 came near the house of P.W. 47 could not be accepted. It was also pointed  out by  the Court of appeal below that P.W. 72 has not  spoken about  presence of P.W. 1 at about that time either in  Crime No. 326 or in Crime No. 328 of 1968. It was only during  the investigation  in Crime  No.  327  of  1968 namely the  connected arson  case, P.W.  72 made  the  above statement. [208 C-D]      4. It  was not  improbable that  because at the time of the recording  of statement  of P.Ws.  34 to 37, P.W. 79 was not aware of the death of Packiriswami Pillai, so he did not consider it a grave crime and did not register it separately as spoken  to by him. P.W. 79 further stated in his evidence that both  the occurrences  namely attack on P.Ws. 54 and 55 and Packiriswami  Pillai formed  part of  one and  the  same trans action.  P.W. 79 further admitted that he ought not to have registered  a separate case in Crime No. 328 of 1968 on the statement  of P.W.  31. It was rightly held by the Court of appeal  below that P.W. 79 adopted irregular procedure in registering separate  Crime  number  on  the  basis  of  the statement of  P.W. 31  and this cannot lead to the inference that P.Ws.  34 to 37 were examined only after examination of P.W. 31. It  was rightly  held by  the court of appeal below that these  irregularities  committed  by  P.W.  79  in  not recording the statement of P.Ws. 34 to 37 in Case Diary Form and registering  the separate  crime number on the statement of P.W.  31 could not militate against the prosecution case. No motive  has been suggested against P.W. 79. [208 G-H; 209 A-B]      5. The  accused 1  and 2  have been  convicted  by  the Courts below  on  the  finding  that  the  offences  charged against them  have been  proved by  the eye witnesses beyond any reasonable  doubt.  There  was  no  illegality  nor  any question of principle involved in the matter of making order sentencing them  to imprisonment  as provided in 88. 302 and 364 of  the Indian  Penal Code.  Therefore, the Court is not inclined to  interfere with  the  sentences  passed  by  the Courts below. [209 E-F]      State of  Maharastra v.  Mayer Hans George, A.I.R. 1965

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9  

S.C. 722 applied.      Pritam Singh  v. The  State, A.I.R.  1950 S.C.  169 and Sadhu Singh Harnam Singh v. state of Pepsu) A.I.R. 1954 S.C. 271 referred to. 203

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Criminal  Appeal  No. 234 of 1973.      From the  Judgment and  Order  dated  4.8.1972  of  the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1971.      R.K.  Garg,   Gopal  Singh   and  L.R.  Singh  for  the Appellants.      K.G. Bhagat,  A.V. Rangam,  Umanath Singh, V.C. Nagaraj and R.B. Misra for the Respondent.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      B.C. RAY,  J. This  appeal on special leave is directed against  the  Judgment  and  Order  of  the  High  Court  of Judicature at  Madras dated  4.8.1972 in Criminal Appeal No. 23  of  1971  whereby  the  appeal  was  dismissed  and  the conviction and  sentences passed  by the  Court of Sessions, east Thanjavur  Division at Nagapattinam against the accused nos. 1, 2, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 20 were confirmed.      The prosecution case is as follows:      All the  accused appellants  are residents  of  various villages within  Keevalur Police  Station. The first accused is the  leader of  the Left  Communist Party are also of the Harijan Kisans  of five  neighbouring villages. Accused nos. 17 and  18 are  the leaders  of the  Left Communist Party at Keezha  Venmani  village.  There  were  serious  differences between the  Mirasdars and  the Harijan  labourers regarding the fixation of wages for harvest. These troubles started in 1967 and  the Kisans have been agitating for higher wages by taking processions  and  convening  meetings.  There  was  a settlement in 1967 whereby the Mannargudi agreement was made between the parties providing for additional half measure of paddy to the Harijan labourers. This settlement was enforced from  January   1968,  but  in  November  1968  the  Harijan labourers demanded  uniform wages  of six  measures of paddy per kalam  of paddy  harvested and in case this six measures of paddy  was not  paid, the  labourers trespassed  into the lands and  illegally harvested paddy crops. This created the trouble as  the local Harijan labourers refused to work at a low wage  and demanded  higher wages.  There was  the  Paddy Producers  Association   having  its   offices  in   several villages. P.W. 1 Gopal Krishna Naidu was the President of 204 Paddy Producers  Association of Nagai Taluk and P.W. 19 Ramu Plllai was  the President  of the Association at Irukkai and he  deceased   Packiriswami  Pillai  was  a  member  of  the Association. The  Mirasdars used  to  bring  labourers  from outside for  harvest of  paddy from  their fields  as  local labourers were  reluctant to harvest paddy at the wage of 4- 1/2 measures  of paddy.  The local  labourers were very much aggrieved  by   this  bringing   of  men  from  outside  for harvesting of paddy.      On  25th  December,  1968  Packiriswami  Pillai,  since deceased, alongwith  other  labourers  of  Irakkai  came  to harvest the  paddy crops  from the  fields of  the Mirasidar P.W. 15  at about  9 a.m.  It appears  that on  apprehending trouble P.W.  15 sent  Exhibit P.  9  to  the  Inspector  at Keevalur Police  Station and  Exhibit P.  8 to the Vallvalam Police Station  requesting for  sending some  police men  so

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9  

that harvesting  of crops  might  be  done  peacefully.  The harvesting of  crops was  over by  5.30 p.m. and each of the labourers were  fed with  Sambar Satham.  Each of  them were paid 4-1/2 measures of paddy per kalam. P.Ws. 25, 26 and one Rangayyan left  immediately as  they wanted  to go to Thevur for seeing  a picture.  The seventeen Irukkai people started for home sometime thereafter. The Irukkai  labourers reached the east-west Harijan Street at about 7.30 p.m. P.Ws. 42 and 43 purchased  betels in the shop of P.W. 30, Subramaniam, of the main  road. There  was moon  light and  electric  light. There were  bamboo clusters  in the form of a hood on either side  of  the  east-west  Harijan  Street  near  the  second electric lamp  post from  the west. At the east west Harijan Street, P.Ws.  31, 32,  34 to  44 saw  a crowd  of 10  to 15 persons standing.  In that  crowd PWs.  31, 32, 34 to 37 saw accused  Nos.  1  and  2  armed  with  aruvals.  Tile  crowd questioned them  as to which place they belonged to, whereon they replied that they belonged to Irukkai. Immediately, A-l Gopal cried  out, "Do  not leave  Irukkai people,  cut them, beat them."  A crowd  of about  50 persons  being armed with aruvals,  sticks  etc.  came  running  towards  the  Irukkai people.  P.Ws.   31,  32,  34  to  37  while  running  found Packiriswami Pillai  tripping  and  falling  down  near  the electric lamp post on the Harijan Street. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 and  some others  in the  crowd also  lifted him by hands, legs and  clothes. Then  he was  carried  to  some  distance towards the east. At that time Packiriswami Pillai cried out that he  was being  cut by Gopal (A-1) and they were leaving him behind  and running.  P.Ws. 31,  32 and 34 to 37 saw the first accused cutting Packiriswamy Pillai with aruval on his neck and on his head. P.Ws. 31, 32, 347 35, 36 and 37 205 ran towards  the Caste  Hindu Street  and ultimately entered into the  house of  P.W. 47.  Another crowd of 50-60 persons armed with  aruvals and  sticks came from the south and they caused injuries  on the  persons of P.Ws. 54 and 55 who came out of their houses. On the same day at about 8.00 p.m. P.W. 79, Inspector  of Police, Keevalur Police Station on getting information that some persons armed with lethal weapons were parading on  the main  road beyond Thevur and towards south, after  requisitioning  a  vehicle  (van)  from  Nagapattinam Police Station sent P.W. 72, the Head Constable with the van for road  patrolling between  Thevur and  Killukudi. P.W. 72 with some  S.A.P. men  went  to  Keezha  Vanmani  and  after collecting the injured persons from the house of P. W. 47 as well as  collecting the  injured P.Ws.  54 and 55 in the van came  to   the  Keevalur   Police  Station,  where  P.W.  79 (Inspector of  Police) recorded the statement of P.W. 54 who was lying  seriously injured  in the  van and registered the same as Crime No. 326 of 1968 of Keevalur Police Station. He thereafter recorded the statements of P.W. 55 in the van and recorded the  statements of  other P.Ws.  34 to  37  in  the Police Station.  Thereafter P.W. 79 at about 11.45 p.m. left for Keezha  Venmani and reached at about 12.00 mid night. He met P.W.  31  there.  P.W.  79  then  went  to  Nadu  street alongwith P.W.  31 and  found the  dead body of Packiriswami Pillai kept  leaning against  a Coconut  tree with  multiple injuries. P.  W. 79  recorded the  statement of P. W. 31 and registered the same as Crime No. 328 of 1968.      The learned  Sessions Judge  after  duly  weighing  the evidences of  P.Ws. found inter alia that there was electric light and  also moon  light at  the time  of the occurrence. P.Ws. 31,  32 and  34 to  37 witnessed  the  fatal  injuries caused by  aruvals on  the head  and  neck  of  Packiriswami Plllai by  Gopal (A-l). It was also held that the crying out

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9  

by the  deceased Packiriswami  Pillai that  Gopal (A-1)  was cutting him  was in  the nature  of Dying Declaration and no motive  could  be  ascribed  for  the  deceased  to  falsely implicate the  accused A-1  Gopal at  that moment. Moreover, the  injuries   sustained  by   P.Ws.  34  to  36  with  all probabilities establish  the presence  of these  P.Ws. at  a close range  and  seeing  the  occurrence.  There  was  also overwhelming evidence  as to  the presence  of  A-1  in  the crowd. The learned Sessions Judge found accused No. 1 guilty of  offence  under  s.  302  I.P.C.  and  sentenced  him  to imprisonment for  life. He  also found  the  accused  No.  1 alongwith accused  Nos. 2,  13, 17  and 18  guilty of murder under s.148  I.P.C. and  sentenced each  of them  to undergo rigorous 206 imprisonment for  two years.  Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were also held guilty of the offence under s. 364 I.P.C. and sentenced each of  them to  undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years. All  these  sentences  will  run  concurrently.  Out  of  22 accused, 14 of the accused were acquitted and 8 of them i.e. accused Nos.  1, 2, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 20 were convicted under various  offences and  they were  sentenced to  suffer rigorous imprisonment for various terms.      Against the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction, all the  8 accused  persons failed Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1971. The appeal was dismissed and the conviction of all the accused appellants  for various  offences and  sentences  of imprisonment awarded against each of them were confirmed.      Mr. Garg,  learned counsel, appearing only on behalf of the accused  appellant No. 1 has submitted before this Court that he  will argue  in this  appeal only  on behalf  of the accused  appellant  No.  1  Gopal  and  as  regards  accused appellant No.  2 he  further submitted  before us  that  the appellant No.  2 Ramayyan  who was convicted under s. 364 I. P. C.  and sentenced  to undergo  rigorous imprisonment  for five years  may be  granted exemption  from  undergoing  the remaining term of the sentence.      It has  been firstly  contended by  Mr.  Garg,  learned counsel, that the statement of P.W. 54 Packiriswamy Poraiyar (exhibit P-11)  which was recorded by P.W. 79 and registered in Crime No. 326 of 1968 did not mention about the attack on deceased Packiriswami  Pillai or  any Irukkai people. It has also been  submitted  that  P.W.  72  (Head  Constable)  who collected the  injured person  P.Ws. 54,  55 and 34 to 37 in the van and took them to the Police Station at Keevalur also did not  tell about  the attack on the deceased Packiriswami Pillai.  It   has  been,   therefore,  submitted   that  the statements of P.Ws. 34 to 37 were recorded not at the Police Station immediately  after recording  statement of  P.W.  54 i.e. Exhibit  P-11. It  has also  been  submitted  that  the accused Gopal  (A-1) who  is well known to the Mirasdars has been falsely  implicated at  the instance  of P.W. 1, who as stated by  P.W. 72  came to  the place  where  P.W.  72  was bringing in the injured persons in the van i.e. P.Ws. 54, 55 and 34  to 37  for bring  them to  the Police  Station. This submission has  no legs  to stand  upon. It has been held by both the  courts below  that the evidences of P.Ws. 34 to 37 were recorded  by the  Inspector,  Keevalur  Police  Station (P.W. 79) as soon as they were brought to the Police 207 Station at about 10.30 a.m. All these witnesses have clearly stated in  their depositions that they witnessed A-1 Inflict cutting injuries on the neck and head of Packiriswami Pillai after lifting  him alongwith  other accused and carrying him to the east of Harijan Street. The court of appeal below has

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9  

rightly held  that P.W.  54  was  only  concerned  with  the incident that  occured before  his  house  and  as  such  in Exhibit P-11  there was  only  the  reference  to  the  said incident. It  was also  held that  P.W. 79 in his deposition refuted the suggestion that he did not examine P.W. 34 to 37 at the  time alleged  by him. Moreover all these P.Ws. 34 to 37 suffered several injuries being chased by the crowd while running towards the house of P.W. 47. Therefore evidences of all these  eye witnesses as well as of P.W. 31 were believed by both  the courts below that A-1 caused fatal cut injuries on the  person of  deceased Packiriswami Pillai. P.W. 65 Dr. Madan  Gopal,   Assistant  Surgeon,   Government   Hospital, Nagapattinam, who  conducted post-mortem  also stated in his deposition that  out of the 11 injuries caused on the person of deceased  Packiriswami Pillai,  the injuries Nos. 1 and 2 which could have been caused by single cut was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The Doctor has also stated  in his  evidence that  after the  infliction of injury No.  1, the injured could have shouted out. There is, therefore, ample  evidence to  negative the  submission that the accused  No. 1 was falsely implicated. Moreover, P.W. 72 has stated  in his deposition that he is deaf and as such he could not  hear whether  P.Ws. 34  to 37  stated  about  the injureis caused  by A-1  on deceased Packiriswami Pillai. He also  stated   that  he   heard  P.Ws.  34  to  37  uttering Packiriswami, Packiriswami.  It was rightly held by both the courts below  that P.W.  72 was deaf and could not hear what they told him. The non- mentioning of attack on Packiriswami Pillai by  P.W. 54 in his statement does not in any way lead to the  inference that the statements of P.Ws. 34 to 37 were recorded after recording of the statement of P.W. 31. It has been tried  to be  submitted in  this  connection  that  the statements of  these P.Ws.  were recorded  in plain-sheet of paper instead  of recording  in diary  form, and this raises suspician that the statements of the P.Ws. 34 to 37 were not recorded immediately after the recording of the statement of P.W. 54.  This submission  was also  set at  naught  by  the courts below by holding that P.W. 79 recorded the statements of P.Ws.  34 to  37 in the Police Station after recording of the statements of P.Ws. 54 and 55. The mere recording of 208 statements in  plain-sheet instead of in diary form in these A circumstances  does not  lead to  any where in view of the clear evidence  of P.W.  79 which  was believed  by both the courts  below  that  the  statements  of  these  P.Ws.  were recorded by him immediately after recording the statement of P.W. 54 (Exhibit P-11).      It was  submitted that  had P.Ws.  31, 32  and 34 to 37 known about  the attack  on deceased Packiriswami Pillai and his being  carried away, it was unlikely that they would not have informed  P.W. 1,  who came  there as stated by P.W. 72 and P.W.  1 in  that case would have taken further action in the matter  with the  help of  P.W. 72.  This submission has also no merit. It has been held by the court of appeal below that P.Ws.  31, 32  and 34  to 37  clearly stated  in  their evidence that  they did  not see P.W. 1 at all. The evidence of P.W.  1 was  that he  did not go to Caste Hindu Street at that time.  In view  of these evidences, the court of appeal below held  that the  evidence of P.W. 72 to the effect that P.W. 1 came near the house of P.W. 47 could not be accepted. it was  also pointed  out by  the court of appeal below that P.W. 72 has not spoken about presence of P.W. 1 at that time either in Crime No. 326 or in Crime No. 328 of  1968. It was only during  the investigation  in Crime  No.  327  of  1968 namely the  connected arson  case P.W.  72  made  the  above

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9  

statement. Therefore, this submission is not sustainable.      It was  submitted by  Mr. Garg  that had P.Ws. 34 to 37 stated in their statements which were recorded by P.W. 72 at Keevalur Police  Station about  the attack  on  Packiriswami Pillai,  then   that  statement  would  have  been  recorded separately and a separate crime number would have been given to it  as was  done in  recording statement  of P.W.  31 and registering it  in Crime  No. 32 of 1968. It was, therefore, suggested that  P.Ws. 34 to 37 were examined by P.W. 79 only after recording  statement of  P.W. 31.  This submission was also urged  before the Court of appeal below and it was held that it  was not  improbable that because at the time of the recording of  statement of  P.Ws. 34 to 37, P. W. 79 was not aware of  the death  of Packiriswamy  Pillai, so  he did not consider it a grave crime and did not register it separately as spoken  to by him. P.W. 79 further stated in his evidence that both  the occurrences  namely attack on P.Ws. 54 and 55 and Packiriswami  Pillai formed  part of  one and  the  same transaction. P.W.  79 further  admitted that he ought not to have registered  a separate case in Crime No. 328 of 1968 on the statement of P.W. 31. It was 209 rightly held  by the  Court of  appeal below  that  P.W.  79 adopted irregular  procedure in  registering separate  crime number on  the basis  of the  statement of  P.W. 31 and this cannot lead  to the  inference that  P.Ws.  34  to  37  were examined only  after examination  of P.W. 31. It was rightly held by  the Court of appeal below that these irregularities committed by P.W. 79 in not recording the statement of P.Ws. 34 to  37 in  Case Diary  Form and  registering the separate crime number  on the statement of P.W. 31 could not militate against the  prosecution case.  No motive has been suggested against P.W. 79.      It was  lastly submitted  before us by Mr. Garg that in view of  the sentence  already suffered  by A-l and A-2 this Court should  remit the  remaining period of their sentence. We are  unable to  accept this  submission advanced  by  Mr. Garg.  Mention  may  be  made  in  this  connection  to  the observations of  this Court  in State of Maharastra v. Mayer Hans George, A.I.R. [1965] S.C. 722, which are as follows:-           "It is  the settled rule of the Supreme Court that           it would not interfere with the sentence passed by           the Courts  below unless there is an illegality in           it  or   the  same   involves  any   question   of           principle."      As we  have  already  stated  herein  before  that  the accused 1  and 2  have been convicted by the courts below on the finding that the offences charged against them have been proved by  the eye  witnesses beyond  any reasonable  doubt. There was  no  illegality  nor  any  question  of  principle involved in  the matter  of making  order sentencing them to imprisonment as  provided in  ss. 302  and 364 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the sentences passed by the Courts below.      It is  pertinent to  mention here the observations made by this  Court in  Pritam Singh  v. The State, A.I.R. [1950] S.C. 169, which are as follows:-           "It will  not grant  special leave to appeal under           Article 136  (1) of  the Constitution unless it is           shown that  exceptional and  special circumstances           exist, that  substantial and  grave injustice  has           been  done  and  the  case  in  question  presents           features of sufficient gravity to warrant a review           of the decision appealed against and that only 210

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9  

         those points  can be urged at the final hearing of           A the  appeal which  are fit  to be  urged at  the           preliminary stage  when leave  is asked for. It is           well established  that  this  court  does  not  by           special leave  convert  itself  into  a  court  to           review evidence  of a  third time. Where, however,           the court  below fails  in apprehending  the  true           effect of  a material change in the versions given           by the  witnesses immediately after the occurrence           and the narrative at the trial with respect to the           nature and  character of  the offence, it seems to           us that  in such a situation it would not be right           for this  court to  affirm such a decision when it           occasions a failure of justice."      This decision  has been  relied upon  and followed in a subsequent decision  of this  Court in  Sadhu  Singh  Harnan Singh v. State of Pepsu, A.I.R. [1954] S.C. 271.      In the  premise aforesaid, we do not find any infirmity for less  any illegality  or failure  of justice which would impel us  to interfere  with the  order  of  conviction  and sentence concurrently arrived at by both the courts below.      We, therefore,  dismiss  the  appeal  and  confirm  the convicFPJ tion and  sentences passed  on accused  Nos. A-l  and A-2 as well as on other appellants. M.L.A.                                Appeal dismissed. 211