http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: JAWAHAR LAL SINGH

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: NARESH SINGH & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT10/02/1987

BENCH: OZA, G.L. (J) BENCH: OZA, G.L. (J) DUTT, M.M. (J)

CITATION:  1987 AIR  724            1987 SCR  (2) 220  1987 SCC  (2) 222        JT 1987 (1)   388  1987 SCALE  (1)284

ACT:     Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: s.378(1) &  (3)--Petition by  State for leave to appeal against acquittal  of  accused charged  under s.396 IPC dismissed in limine by  High  Court without  a reasoned order--Case remitted to High  Court  for disposal in accordance with law.

HEADNOTE:     A  number  of persons were tried on  the  allegation  of committing  a  decoity with murder and charged  for  offence under s.396 of the Indian Penal Code. Eye witnesses  claimed to  have  identified the accused persons in the light  of  a lantern.  The  evidence also attributed different  parts  to different accused persons. The trial court after considering the  evidence  discarded it and acquitted  all  the  accused persons of the charge.     The  High  Court  dismissed the petition  for  leave  to appeal against acquittal filed by the State Government under s.378(1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in limine with  the  words  "Prayer for leave to  appeal  is  refused. Appeal  is dismissed." Without examining the reasons on  the basis  of which the trial court had discarded the  evidence. The appellant appealed to this Court. Allowing the appeal,     HELD:  The High Court should have considered the  matter and passed a reasoned order. The incident was such wherein a number  of  persons were involved. There were  a  number  of witnesses  examined  in the case. A perusal  of  the  record shows  that all the reasons on the basis of which the  whole of the prosecution evidence had been discarded by the  trial court  were not so simple or so good that they did  not  re- quire examination. [222B-C]     The appeal alongwith the petition filed by the State for leave  to appeal is restored to the file of the High  Court, and  directed to be disposed of after hearing  the  parties, giving reasons for conclusions. [222E-F]

JUDGMENT:     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 150

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

of 1986. 221     From  the Judgment and Order dated 14.7.83 of the  Patna High Court in Govt. Appeal No. 29/83. S.N. Misra, M.M.P. Sinha and P.C. Kapur for the Petitioner. S.C. Misra and, Mrs. Gian Sudha Misra for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by     OZA, J. This appeal has been filed in this Court against the dismissal in limine of a petition filed by the State  of Bihar  in  the  High Court of Judicature  at  Patna  wherein learned  Judges  of the High Court rejected a  petition  for leave to appeal against acquittal filed by the State Govern- ment under Sec.378(1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Proce- dure in limine by any saying "Prayer for leave to appeal  is refused. Appeal is dismissed."     Before the trial Court 25 accused persons were tried  on the  allegation that they committed dacoity and in the  com- mission  of the said dacoity murder of one A jab  Lal  Singh was  committed.  Consequently all of them were  charged  for offence  under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code.  It  is alleged  that in the night intervening between 5th  and  6th day  of June, 1980 at Village Nandial Patti situated  within P.S.  Amarpur in the District of Bhagalpur, occurrence  took place  in  the house of one Jawahar Lal Singh P .W.  21  who lodged  the First Information Report, his house is  situated in  Nandial Patti and in the course of dacoity  his  brother Ajab  Lal  Singh was killed. The incident is  said  to  have taken  place at 12 O’clock at midnight, and the  information was  lodged on 6th of June 1980 at 8.45 A.M.,  at  Bhagalpur Medical College Hospital as the informant was lying  injured in  the  surgical ward of the Hospital. At the  trial  there were  number of eye witnesses examined who claimed  to  have identified  the  accused persons in the light of  a  lentern burning at that time. The evidence also attributed different parts  to  different accused persons. The  learned  Sessions Judge after considering the evidence discarded the  evidence and  acquitted all the accused persons from the  charge  le- velled against them and unfortunately Hon’ble the High Court without  examining  the reasons on the basis  on  which  the learned  Sessions  Judge discarded  evidence  dismissed  the leave  petition and appeal as mentioned above and  therefore we are at a disadvantage as we have not before us the exami- nation  of  the reasons by the High Court on  the  basis  of which  the learned trial Court discarded the  testimony  and acquitted all the accused persons. Although learned  counsel for the respondent refer- 222 red  to  portions of the evidence to justify  the  order  of acquittal  but also contended that in case this Court  feels that  the High Court should have considered the  matter  and pass  a  reasoned order it would be proper that we  may  not refer to any part of the evidence on merits nor express  any opinion.     Learned counsel for both the sides did not dispute  that the  incident  was such wherein number of persons  were  in- volved. They also frankly accepted that there are number  of witnesses examined in the case. A perusal of the judgment of the  learned trial Court also shows that all the reasons  on the basis of which the whole of the prosecution evidence has been discarded is not so simple or reasons so good that they do not require examination. Under these circumstances there- fore without going into the merits we feel that it would  be better that the matter be examined by the learned Judges  of the High Court so that we may have the advantage of  consid- ering  the considered opinion of the High Court on the  rea-

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

sons which weighed with the learned trial Court in  discard- ing the prosecution evidence and acquitting the respondents.     In  view of the facts of the case and the  circumstances indicated above we feel that it would be better if the  High Court  considers the matter and dispose it of  after  giving reasons  and in view of this we think it proper not  to  ex- press  any  opinion on any of the matters that  may  deserve consideration.  The appeal is therefore allowed.  The  order passed by the High Court on 14th July 1983 is set aside  and the  appeal alongwith petition for leave filed by the  State of Bihar is restored to the file of the High Court and it is directed  that  Hon’ble  the High Court  after  hearing  the parties  shall dispose of the matter giving reasons for  the conclusions in accordance with law. P.S.S.                                                Appeal allowed. 223