Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Uttar Pradesh Murder Case

The Supreme Court of India recently upheld the conviction of Gurmail Singh in a decades-old murder case from Uttar Pradesh, confirming the judgment of the Allahabad High Court. The case, which originated from a land dispute, involved a violent attack that led to the death of Dalip Singh and serious injuries to others. The decision reaffirmed the principles of unlawful assembly and vicarious liability under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The appeal before the Supreme Court was limited to a plea for modifying the conviction from Section 302 IPC (murder) to Section 304 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder). The Court, however, rejected the appeal and upheld the life sentence imposed on the appellant.

Background of the Case

The case dates back to October 26, 1980, when a land dispute between two groups in village Dhuriayee, Rampur, escalated into a violent confrontation. The dispute involved the partition of 16 acres of land, with 10 acres allotted to Thakur Singh and Chanan Singh, and 6 acres to Dalip Singh. A disagreement arose when Thakur Singh and Chanan Singh sought to exchange their portion of land, which Dalip Singh refused.

On the fateful day, Dalip Singh and his family were at home when their servant informed them that the opposing party was illegally harvesting their crops. When Dalip Singh and his sons, Darshan Singh (PW-1) and Nirmal Singh (PW-2), arrived at the scene, they were met with armed attackers. The assailants included Thakur Singh, Chanan Singh, Karnail Singh, Gurmail Singh, and others, who were armed with firearms, swords, and lathis. Dalip Singh was shot multiple times, leading to his death, while his sons sustained serious injuries.

Trial Court Conviction

The Additional Sessions Judge-III, Rampur, convicted the accused under various sections of the IPC, including:

Section 302/149 (Murder in furtherance of common object of unlawful assembly)
Section 324/149 (Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons in furtherance of common object)
Section 323/149 (Voluntarily causing hurt in furtherance of common object)
Section 148 (Rioting, armed with a deadly weapon)
Section 147 (Rioting)

The court sentenced the convicts to life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC, along with lesser sentences for other offenses, to run concurrently.

High Court Appeal

The convicted individuals appealed before the Allahabad High Court, but during the pendency of the appeal, seven of the convicts passed away. The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions and sentences of the remaining appellants.

Supreme Court Proceedings

Before the Supreme Court, the sole appellant, Gurmail Singh, limited his argument to seeking an alteration of the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 IPC, contending that his role in the crime was minor and that he was only a member of the unlawful assembly without having inflicted fatal injuries.

The Supreme Court, in rejecting this argument, noted that the appellant was an active member of an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons and that the attack was premeditated. The Court ruled that the appellant was vicariously liable under Section 149 IPC, which holds every member of an unlawful assembly responsible for the actions committed in furtherance of the common object.

Key Observations by the Supreme Court

The evidence of the injured witnesses, PW-1 and PW-2, was credible and corroborated by medical reports.
The non-recovery of weapons did not weaken the prosecution’s case, as the medical evidence clearly established gunshot wounds.
The presence of the appellant in the unlawful assembly was sufficient to establish liability under Section 149 IPC.
The attack was not a spontaneous act but was carried out with premeditation.
The injuries inflicted on the deceased and others indicated a clear intent to kill.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Section 302/149 IPC, stating:

“The unlawful assembly was armed with deadly weapons, and the attack resulted in the death of Dalip Singh and injuries to others. The common object of the assembly was clearly to cause fatal injuries, and all members are vicariously liable. The conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court and confirmed by the High Court are justified and do not warrant interference.”

The appeal was dismissed, and the life sentence of the appellant was upheld.

Conclusion

This judgment reinforces the doctrine of vicarious liability under Section 149 IPC, emphasizing that even those who do not directly inflict injuries can be held equally responsible if they are part of an unlawful assembly with a common intent. The ruling serves as a deterrent against organized criminal activities and highlights the judiciary’s commitment to upholding justice in cases of premeditated violence.

Petitioner Name: Gurmail Singh & Anr..
Respondent Name: State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice C.T. Ravikumar, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia.
Place Of Incident: Dhuriayee, Rampur, Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 16-10-2022.

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

Download Judgment: gurmail-singh-&-anr.-vs-state-of-uttar-prade-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-16-10-2022.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download 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 Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Custodial Deaths and Police Misconduct
See all petitions in Judgment by C.T. Ravikumar
See all petitions in Judgment by Sudhanshu Dhulia
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments October 2022
See all petitions in 2022 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