Murder Conviction Overturned: Supreme Court Acquits Accused in 1980 Killing Case

The Supreme Court of India recently ruled on a decades-old murder case, ultimately acquitting the accused, Ramvir, of all charges. The case revolved around a fatal shooting incident in 1980 in Uttar Pradesh, where the prosecution alleged that the appellant was part of an unlawful assembly that killed the victim, Siya Ram. The trial court had convicted Ramvir under Section 302 IPC (murder), but the Supreme Court found insufficient evidence to sustain the conviction.

Background of the Case

The case stemmed from an incident on December 25, 1980, when Siya Ram and his son, Kripal (PW-2), were walking towards a location known as “Baithak” in village Bishnodi, Uttar Pradesh. As they neared the hut of Ram Vilas, a group of six accused, including Ramvir, allegedly ambushed them and fired shots. Siya Ram was hit and died from his injuries.

Badri (PW-1), Siya Ram’s uncle, lodged an FIR the following morning, naming six individuals: Ramvir, Bhoorey, Satya Ram, Shaitan Singh, Ram Das, and Jagdamba Prasad. Based on the complaint, all six were arrested and charged with murder under Sections 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Key Issues Raised

Was Ramvir proven beyond doubt to be the person who fired the fatal shot?
Did the prosecution establish the presence of an unlawful assembly as required under Sections 148 and 149 IPC?
Did the High Court err in convicting Ramvir under Sections 148/149 despite his acquittal on these charges by the trial court?

Arguments of the Petitioners (Ramvir)

The defense argued that the prosecution had failed to prove that Ramvir fired the fatal shot.
There was no forensic evidence linking Ramvir’s rifle to the bullets recovered from the crime scene.
The alleged rifle used in the shooting was not immediately taken into police custody but was surrendered in court much later.
The High Court had no jurisdiction to convict Ramvir under Sections 148/149 IPC when the trial court had acquitted him on those charges and no appeal was filed by the State against this acquittal.

Arguments of the Respondents (State of Uttar Pradesh)

The prosecution maintained that multiple eyewitnesses, including the victim’s son, had identified Ramvir as one of the shooters.
The fact that Ramvir and five other accused were present at the crime scene was sufficient to establish their role in the killing.
Although no forensic match was found between the bullets and Ramvir’s rifle, the presence of gunfire evidence was enough to sustain the murder charge.
The High Court was justified in convicting Ramvir under Sections 148/149 IPC as he was part of an unlawful assembly.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

The Supreme Court examined the evidence and procedural aspects of the case carefully. It found several inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case:

The ballistic report (ExC-1) did not support the claim that the bullets recovered from the scene were fired from Ramvir’s rifle.
The prosecution had not established that Ramvir fired the fatal shot, a crucial requirement for conviction under Section 302 IPC.
The trial court had already acquitted Ramvir of charges under Section 148/149 IPC, and since no appeal was filed by the State against this acquittal, the High Court had no authority to convict him under those sections.
There was no evidence to support the claim that Ramvir was part of an unlawful assembly other than the testimony of witnesses who were relatives of the victim.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant and made the following key findings:

The conviction under Sections 148/149 IPC was set aside as the trial court had already acquitted Ramvir on these charges, and no appeal was filed against that part of the ruling.
The murder conviction under Section 302 IPC was overturned due to lack of direct evidence linking Ramvir to the firing of the fatal shot.
The Supreme Court granted Ramvir the benefit of the doubt and ordered his immediate release unless required in any other case.

The judgment stated:

“There was no evidence on record suggestive of the inference which was drawn by the learned trial judge against the present appellant that he was the author of the shot that hit and killed the deceased Siya Ram.”

Implications of the Judgment

The ruling highlights the importance of strong forensic evidence in securing a conviction in murder cases. The case underscores key legal principles:

Burden of Proof: The prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime. In this case, the lack of forensic evidence linking Ramvir to the fatal shot resulted in an acquittal.
Finality of Acquittal: Once a trial court acquits an accused on certain charges, an appellate court cannot convict them on the same charges unless an appeal is filed by the prosecution.
Role of Eyewitness Testimony: The Supreme Court examined whether the witnesses’ testimonies were sufficient to uphold the conviction and found them insufficient without corroborative evidence.

This verdict serves as a crucial precedent in cases where conviction is sought based solely on eyewitness accounts without forensic corroboration. It reaffirms that no individual should be convicted based on weak or insufficient evidence.

Petitioner Name: Ramvir.
Respondent Name: State of Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment By: Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre, Justice Indu Malhotra.
Place Of Incident: Bishnodi, Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 26-10-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Ramvir vs State of Uttar Prade Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 26-10-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Abhay Manohar Sapre
See all petitions in Judgment by Indu Malhotra
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments October 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category