The division judge bench of Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi of the Patna High Court in the case of Moti Ullah vs. the State of Bihar held that merely obtaining the fingerprint and that being placed on record would not be of any avail to the prosecution unless it is proved that the same fingerprint was available on the butt of the weapon used for assault.
Brief Facts:
The factual matrix of the case is that the accused was the husband of the deceased and the incident took place in front of the mother, sister, brother-in-law, and other relatives of the deceased. The FIR was registered at the instance of the mother of the deceased in which she alleged that the appellant slashed the neck of the deceased with the knife. The appellant was convicted by the trial court under Section 302 of the Indian penal code, 1860, and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that most of the witnesses are the close relatives of the appellant and they have only deposed against the appellant as there was a strained relationship between the deceased and the appellant. It was furthermore submitted that the appellant was arrested on the same day and not even once he tried to escape. Also, the place of occurrence was a busy road and no on-lookers were produced at the witness stand.
Contentions of the Respondents:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent contended that all the witnesses saw the appellant and the weapon used was immediately sent for the forensic examination and the serological report also confirmed that the weapon had human blood on it.
Observations of the Court:
The Hon’ble court observed that the witnesses examined supported the case of the prosecution in its entirety.
It was furthermore observed that the Investigating Officer's use of the appellant's fingerprint, which was acquired, was ineffective. The prosecution would not benefit from just collecting the fingerprint and having it recorded unless it could be demonstrated that the identical print was also visible on the butt of the weapon of assault. However, this simply can’t be a ground to reject a prosecution case.
It was noted that the medical testimony was also in complete consonance with the prosecution version. It appears that the other injuries suffered by the deceased were caused to her while saving herself from the attack.
Based on these considerations, the Hon’ble Court was of the view that the trial court was right in convicting the appellant.
The decision of the Court:
With the above direction, the Hon’ble Court dismissed the appeal
Case Title: Moti Ullah Vs The State of Bihar
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vipul M. Pancholi
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. (DB) No. 353 of 2017
Advocates for the Appellants: Mr. Rohit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar No 13, Adv. Mrs. Priti Kumari, Adv. Mrs. Nitu Kumari, Adv.
Advocate for the Respondents: Mrs. Shashi Bala Verma, APP
Read Judgement @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :