ASAR MOHAMMAD AND ORS. versus THE STATE OF U.P.

ASAR MOHAMMAD AND ORS. versus THE STATE OF U.P.

Appellant No.1 is found guilty of offences under Sections 302 and 201 IPC based on circumstantial evidence and his confession corroborated by recovery of dead bodies at his instance. Appellants Nos.2 and 3 are acquitted of offence under Section 302 IPC as there is no independent evidence beyond confession. However, proved circumstances establish their knowledge and conduct to screen principal offender, warranting conviction under Section 201 IPC.

Parties
Appellant No.1/accused No.1: Asar Mohammad; Appellant No.2/accused No.2: Asraf Mohammad; Appellant No.3/accused No.3: Akhtar Mohammad; Respondent: The State of U.P.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment After Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal of appellant No.1 dismissed; appeals of appellant Nos.2 and 3 partly allowed (acquitted of offence under Section 302 IPC; conviction under Section 201 IPC upheld)
Legal Topics
Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, Confession of Co Accused, Section 302 IPC, Section 201 IPC, Section 27 Evidence Act
Criminal Law Murder Circumstantial Evidence Confession of Co Accused Section 302 IPC Section 201 IPC Section 27 Evidence Act

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Asar Mohammad

Appellant No.1/accused No.1

Asraf Mohammad

Appellant No.2/accused No.2

Akhtar Mohammad

Appellant No.3/accused No.3

The State of U.P.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment After Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant No.1 is guilty of offences under Sections 302 and 201 IPC
  2. 2 Whether appellants Nos.2 and 3 can be convicted under Section 302 IPC based solely on the confession of appellant No.1
  3. 3 Whether appellants Nos.2 and 3 are guilty under Section 201 IPC

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant No.1 is found guilty of offences under Sections 302 and 201 IPC based on circumstantial evidence and his confession corroborated by recovery of dead bodies at his instance. Appellants Nos.2 and 3 are acquitted of offence under Section 302 IPC as there is no independent evidence beyond confession. However, proved circumstances establish their knowledge and conduct to screen principal offender, warranting conviction under Section 201 IPC.

Court Disposition

Appeal of appellant No.1 dismissed; appeals of appellant Nos.2 and 3 partly allowed (acquitted of offence under Section 302 IPC; conviction under Section 201 IPC upheld)

Orders

  • Appellant Nos.2 and 3 are acquitted for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC
  • Conviction and sentence of appellant Nos.2 and 3 for offence punishable under Section 201 IPC is upheld