The Supreme Court set aside the High Court order in its judgement dated 23/09/2015 and directed the High Court to decide the case again after hearing the parties in accordance with law. Does it mean that what was done is not according to law?
Facts of the case is that, the State of Rajasthan preferred a Criminal Appeal NO.1246 OF
2015 (S.L.P. [Crl.] No.1621 of 2014) against the judgment dated 29.5.2013
passed by the High Court. The trial court had convicted the accused for commission
of an offence under section 302 and section 458 IPC and sentenced to life
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/- and RI for seven years and a fine of Rs.1,000/-
respectively for the aforesaid offences. While maintaining conviction and
sentence under section 458 IPC, the High Court had altered conviction from section
302 to section 304 Part II and sentenced him to the period already undergone,
i.e. 8 years and 7 months.
The Supreme Court’s own words are self-explanatory: -
“It is
crystal clear that the High Court has not considered the evidence, neither the
nature of injuries nor method and manner in which they were inflicted. The High
Court has also not considered the aspect whether the accused intended to inflict
injuries so as to cause the death. Even the circumstances to take the case out of
the purview of section 302 have also not been discussed by the High Court. Simpliciter,
it has been observed that a careful scrutiny of the entire evidence has been
made but we find from the judgment that no such exercise has been done. Mere
statement in the judgment to that effect is not enough. Evidence is not only required
to be mentioned in the judgment but its evidentiary value has to be assessed
carefully. No such exercise has been made.
Thus, we have no hesitation to set
aside the judgment and order passed by the High Court. While allowing appeal,
we remit the matter to the High Court to decide the same again after hearing
the parties in accordance with law. It is made clear that we have not expressed
any opinion on the merits of the case. The High Court is required to reconsider
the matter in accordance with law and to decide the appeal de novo after
hearing the parties. The respondent-accused shall remain on bail for a period
of four weeks from the date of the judgment during which time he will be free
to apply to the High Court for regular bail."
Quality - One of the main reason for prolonged litigation and accumulation for cases for years together.
No comments:
Post a Comment