Abhinav Mishra|Kirit P. Mehta School of Law| 5th June 2020
Ombir Singh (Appellant(S)) v. State Of Uttar Pradesh and another (Respondent(S))
Introduction
This criminal appeal primarily deals with the delay in sending of FIR to the magistrate as described under section 157 of the Cr.P.C and whether such delay would vitiate a trial or not. The bench comprising Justices NV Ramana, Mohan M. Shanthanagoudar and Sanjiv Khanna. The case note highlights the facts, laws, decision and rationale behind the case.
Facts of the case
- Appellant Ombir Singh has challenged the Allahabad High Court Judgement dating 27/10/2009 confirming his conviction u/s Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
- Abhaiveer Singh Bhadoria was killed on 15/7/1999 at 9 am near the house of Shivraj Sengar by Ombir Sigh and Pramod Singh(Acquitted by trial court)
- The Trial court sentenced Ombir Singh to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 11,000/- which was later upheld by the High court.
- The main contention of the appellant are that the original complainant and PW-2 are unreliable and they have been set up by the prosecution.
- The other contention highlighted that there was an 11 day delay in sending the FIR to the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) thus arguing that the FIR was ante-timed and was politically motivated.
- The appellant argued that he had been framed by the two purported eye witness PW-1 and PW-2 who were not present at the spot.
Rules and Laws applied
Section 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
Section 157 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Holding
The Supreme Court Dismissed the appeal of Ombir Singh and upheld the conviction and sentencing of the appellant u/s 302 read with section 34 of the IPC with section 27 of the Arms Act delivered by the trial court.
Brief Analysis
The primary concern of the SC was regarding the contention of whether the 11 Day delay in sending the report to the CJM would in any way vitiate the trial. The bench referred to the judgement of *Jafel Biswas v. State of West Bengal [2019) 12 SCC 560]* in which it was held that the mere delay in sending the report cannot, in itself, be a good ground for acquittal and that if the court is convinced of the prosecution’s truthfulness it may not be regarded as detrimental to the prosecution’s case. Thus, mere delay in sending the report as per Section 157 of the Cr.P.C is not a ground for acquittal.
Conclusion
The case primary concern is regarding the delay in sending report to the CJM and its effect on the trial. The SC has held and reiterated in this case that while the delay in sending the report to the magistrate as per Section 157 of Cr.P.C is always a ground to challenge the truthfulness of the FIR it cannot be used to vitiate the trial.
Leave a Reply