MAINA SINGH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

MAINA SINGH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Where the charge and prosecution evidence were confined to the five named accused and the four co-accused were acquitted, it was impermissible to invoke s.149 or s.34 I.P.C.; appellant could only be held responsible for offences proved to have been committed by him individually, and on the evidence he was guilty of voluntarily causing grievous hurt by shooting (s.326 I.P.C.) but not of murder under s.302 read with s.34.

Parties
Appellant: Maina Singh; Respondent: State of Rajasthan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 March 1976
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (special Leave) to the Supreme Court / On Appeal From the Rajasthan High Court Judgment Dated 21 4 1971
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Murder, Unlawful Assembly, Common Intention, Acquittal and Conviction, Sections 34 and 149 I.p.c., Section 326 I.p.c.
Criminal Law Evidence Murder Unlawful Assembly Common Intention Acquittal and Conviction Sections 34 and 149 I.p.c. Section 326 I.p.c.

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maina Singh

Appellant

State of Rajasthan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (special Leave) to the Supreme Court / On Appeal From the Rajasthan High Court Judgment Dated 21 4 1971

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant could be convicted under s.302 read with s.34 I.P.C. when the other named co-accused were acquitted
  2. 2 Whether s.149 I.P.C. or s.34 I.P.C. could be invoked where charge and prosecution evidence were confined to named accused and those named accused were acquitted
  3. 3 Whether medical and other evidence supported conviction for murder or for grievous hurt under s.326 I.P.C.

Ratio Decidendi

Where the charge and prosecution evidence were confined to the five named accused and the four co-accused were acquitted, it was impermissible to invoke s.149 or s.34 I.P.C.; appellant could only be held responsible for offences proved to have been committed by him individually, and on the evidence he was guilty of voluntarily causing grievous hurt by shooting (s.326 I.P.C.) but not of murder under s.302 read with s.34.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part.

Orders

  • Conviction under section 302 read with section 34 I.P.C. altered to conviction under section 326 I.P.C.
  • Sentence for the altered conviction reduced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years (to run concurrently with other sentence).