Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction: Appeals by Pappu Tiwari and Law Tiwari Dismissed

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a significant judgment in the case of Pappu Tiwari vs. State of Jharkhand and Law Tiwari @ Upendra Kumar Tiwari vs. State of Jharkhand, affirming the conviction of the appellants in a brutal murder case. The case, which dates back to the year 2000, involved the daylight murder of Vikas Kumar Singh. The judgment provides detailed insights into the criminal trial, the prosecution’s case, the defense’s arguments, and the final legal findings that led to the dismissal of the appeals.

Background of the Case

On March 7, 2000, at around 1:00 PM, Vikas Kumar Singh, a 22-year-old, was attacked and killed by a group of six assailants while on his way to a physical exercise session. According to the prosecution, Vikas was surrounded by six individuals—Pappu Tiwari, Sanjay Ram, Uday Pal, Ajay Pal, Pintu Tiwari, and Law Tiwari—who inflicted multiple injuries on him. Pappu Tiwari fired a gunshot, while the others attacked the victim with knives.

Upon hearing the commotion, the victim’s younger brother, Pankaj Kumar Singh, rushed to the scene. The assailants fled, issuing threats to those present against testifying. The attackers later escaped in a Maruti van. Based on the eyewitness account of Pankaj Kumar Singh, an FIR was lodged under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Arguments by the Prosecution

The prosecution presented multiple eyewitnesses, including the victim’s brother and other bystanders, who confirmed that the accused individuals were responsible for the attack.
The forensic and medical evidence supported the claim that the victim had suffered multiple injuries, including firearm wounds.
The police recovered the Maruti van used in the escape, further corroborating the prosecution’s claims.
The prosecution emphasized the threats made by the accused to silence witnesses, highlighting their criminal intent.

Arguments by the Defense

Pappu Tiwari argued that the case was fabricated and that the FIR was lodged after the post-mortem to implicate him falsely.
Law Tiwari claimed an alibi, asserting that he had a fractured leg at the time of the crime and was undergoing treatment.
The defense pointed out discrepancies between the inquest report and the post-mortem findings, arguing that these inconsistencies raised doubts about the prosecution’s case.
They also contended that key police witnesses had not been examined, weakening the case against the accused.

Observations of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court meticulously examined the trial court’s judgment and the evidence presented by both sides. The Court noted:

“A registered FIR, supported by medical evidence, eyewitness accounts, and forensic findings, establishes the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.”

The Court further emphasized:

“The plea of alibi raised by Law Tiwari was not substantiated with credible medical records or witness testimony. The burden of proving an alibi lies on the accused, and in this case, the defense failed to do so convincingly.”

The Supreme Court dismissed the arguments regarding the FIR being ante-dated, stating that:

“The sequence of events—ranging from the lodging of the FIR to the medical examination—was conducted in a reasonable timeframe, and there is no evidence to suggest manipulation.”

The Court also rejected the claim of inconsistencies between the inquest report and the post-mortem, clarifying that:

“The inquest report is not a substitute for a post-mortem. It merely records preliminary findings, whereas the post-mortem is a detailed forensic examination conducted by experts.”

Final Judgment

After analyzing the submissions, the Supreme Court upheld the life imprisonment sentence of both appellants. The Court stated:

“There is no merit in the appeals filed by Pappu Tiwari and Law Tiwari. The prosecution has successfully established their guilt, and there is no reason to interfere with the trial court’s decision.”

With this ruling, the conviction and sentencing of the accused remain intact. The case serves as an example of the judiciary’s commitment to upholding justice and ensuring that perpetrators of violent crimes face the consequences of their actions.

Petitioner Name: Pappu Tiwari, Law Tiwari @ Upendra Kumar Tiwari.
Respondent Name: State of Jharkhand.
Judgment By: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice M.M. Sundresh.
Place Of Incident: Garhwa, Jharkhand.
Judgment Date: 31-01-2022.

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

Download Judgment: pappu-tiwari,-law-ti-vs-state-of-jharkhand-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-31-01-2022.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 Judgment by Sanjay Kishan Kaul
See all petitions in Judgment by M.M. Sundresh
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments January 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