The Allahabad High Court has set aside a conviction dating back to 1982, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the essential link between dacoity and murder required to attract Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Justice Samit Gopal allowed the criminal appeal filed by Krishna Pal and others, which ultimately survived only in respect of appellant Sattu after the appeals of the other accused abated following their deaths.
Background of the Case
The case arose from the killing of Atar Singh on December 30, 1981, near a culvert in village Chehka, Etah. According to the prosecution, Mahavira and several armed associates confronted Atar Singh, following which firing took place from both sides. Atar Singh sustained multiple firearm injuries and died.
The prosecution alleged that Chandrapal subsequently took away Atar Singh's licensed gun and cartridge belt. An FIR was registered against several named persons and other unknown armed individuals.
The trial court eventually convicted the accused under Section 396 IPC, which deals with dacoity accompanied by murder, and sentenced them to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment.
The surviving appellant, Sattu, argued that no specific act had been attributed to him and that the prosecution itself indicated that the encounter occurred suddenly because of an existing dispute between Atar Singh and Mahavira.
The State, however, maintained that Sattu was named in the FIR and was part of the armed group that fired at Atar Singh. It relied on the accounts of three alleged eyewitnesses and the medical evidence.
Court's Observation
Justice Samit Gopal focused on the legal requirement of Section 396 IPC. The provision applies when five or more persons jointly commit dacoity and murder is committed while carrying out that dacoity.
The Court found that the prosecution narrative itself showed that the two groups met suddenly and that the firing followed a confrontation arising from previous enmity.
“The intention of the accused thus as per the prosecution case cannot be said to be of dacoity with murder.”
The Court further noted that there was no evidence establishing that Mahavira's alleged gang included the surviving appellant. More importantly, the prosecution failed to establish that dacoity was the initial intention and that the murder occurred in the course of committing it.
Decision
The High Court held that the necessary connection between dacoity and murder had not been established. It also noted that no incriminating material had been recovered from Sattu's possession or at his pointing out.
“The prosecution has failed to establish that dacoity was the first intention and in committing dacoity murder was committed.”
The Court therefore acquitted Sattu, cancelled his bail bonds and discharged his sureties. It allowed the appeal and set aside the November 2, 1982 judgment and order of the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Etah.
Case Details
Case Title: Krishna Pal and others vs. State
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 2921 of 1982
Judge: Justice Samit Gopal
Decision Date: August 25, 2026
-300x169.webp)
