{"id":227685,"date":"1994-02-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1994-02-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994"},"modified":"2015-03-17T16:22:08","modified_gmt":"2015-03-17T10:52:08","slug":"abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994","title":{"rendered":"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR 1910, \t\t 1994 SCC Supl. (2)\t 9<\/div>\n
Author: G Ray<\/div>\n
Bench: Ray, G.N. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nABDUL ISE SULEMAN\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF GUJARAT\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT14\/02\/1994\n\nBENCH:\nRAY, G.N. (J)\nBENCH:\nRAY, G.N. (J)\nREDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1994 AIR 1910\t\t  1994 SCC  Supl.  (2)\t 9\n JT 1994 (1)   602\t  1994 SCALE  (1)559\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nRAY,  J.- This appeal is directed against the  judgment\t and
\norder of conviction and sentence passed by the High Court of
\nGujarat\t in Criminal Appeal No. 233 of 1976 on\tApril  4\/25,
\n1979  reversing\t the order of acquittal dated  December\t 23,
\n1975  passed  by  the learned  Sessions\t Judge,\t Bharuch  in
\nSessions  Case\tNo.  30\t of  1975.   Five  accused   persons
\nincluding the appellant were prosecuted in the said Sessions
\nCase  No. 30 of 1975 for offences under Sections  147,\t148,
\n307  and  302 read with Section 149 IPC\t for  murdering\t one
\nyoung  boy,  Ayub Umarji, aged 10 years\t and  injuring\tPW9,
\nGulam Musa Mohmed Ismail with gunshot injuries.\t The learned
\nSessions  Judge\t was of the view that the  prosecution\tcase
\ncould not be accepted because the incident was not likely to
\nbe  witnessed by the prosecution witnesses which,  according
\nto  the\t prosecution  had  happened  at\t night\tand  in\t all
\nprobability  the incident had happened earlier and  the\t boy
\nhad  died  because  of a cross\tfire  between  two  fighting
\ngroups.\n<\/p>\n
+    From  the Judgment and Order dated April 4\/25, 1979  of
\nthe Gujarat High Court in Crl.\tA. No. 233 of 1976
\n10<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
2.   Against  the  said judgment of acquittal the  State  of
\nGujarat\t preferred  Criminal Appeal No. 233 of 1976  in\t the
\nHigh Court of Gujarat against two accused, namely, Hasan Ise
\nSuleman\t and the appellant Abdul Ise Suleman.  The State  of
\nGujarat,  however,  did not prefer any\tappeal\tagainst\t the
\nother  three  accused.\tThe complainant\t Umarji\t Vali  Aslam
\nfiled  a  revisional criminal application No.  182  of\t1976
\nagainst\t all the accused challenging the order of  acquittal
\npassed in their favour.\t Later on, the said complainant\t did
\nnot press the criminal revision application No. 182 of\t1976
\nand the same was dismissed for non-prosecution and  Criminal
\nAppeal No. 233 of 1976 was disposed of by the High Court  by
\nreversing  the order of acquittal and convicting accused  1,
\nHasan  Ise Suleman for offence punishable under Section\t 324
\nIPC  and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment\t for
\none  year  on  that count.  The\t High  Court  convicted\t the
\nappellant accused 2 for an offence punishable under  Section
\n302  read with Section 301 IPC and sentenced him  to  suffer
\nrigorous  imprisonment\tfor  life.  Against  such  order  of
\nconviction  accused 1 preferred Criminal Appeal No.  294  of
\n1979  but in view of the death of the said  appellant  Hasan
\nIse Suleman, during the pendency of this appeal before\tthis
\nCourt,\tthe said appeal was dismissed as  abated.   Criminal
\nAppeal No. 289 of 1979 preferred by appellant accused 2\t was
\nconsidered  on\tmerits\tand is being  disposed\tof  by\tthis
\njudgment.\n<\/p>\n
3.   The prosecution case in short is that on April 14, 1979
\nat  about  5.00 p.m. accused 4, Ibrahim Ismail who  was\t the
\nservant\t  of  the  other  three\t accused  had\tbeaten\t the
\ncomplainant  Umarji’s uncle Ahmed Aslam with a shoe  as\t the
\nsaid Ahmed Aslam also known as Master had demanded one rupee
\nfrom  the said accused 4 as a contribution for giving  water
\nto  the bullocks.  The complainant after returning from\t his
\nfield at about 7.30 p.m. came to know about Such assault  on
\nhis  uncle  and thereafter he went to Pir Chakla  which\t was
\nadjoining  to his house where he met PW 9 Gulam Musa  Mohmed
\nwho was an injured witness and one Abdul Haq the son of said
\nAhmed  Aslam.\tWhile  they had been  discussing  about\t the
\nincident of that assault of Ahmed Aslam, Kalidas Ibrahim, PW
\n10,  also  joined  them.  While they  had  been\t talking  to
\nKalidas\t about the incident, the said persons were near\t the
\nshop of PW 15, Ibrahim and from the said place the house  of
\nPW  4 was visible.  Kalidas then suggested that all of\tthem
\nshould go to the house of accused 3 because they saw all the
\naccused\t persons sitting on the benches of the Otla  of\t the
\nhouse of accused 3. The intention of the complainant and his
\ncompanions  was\t to make a complaint about the\tincident  of
\nbeating\t Ahmed Aslam with shoe by accused 4 because  accused
\n3,  Haji  Ise Suleman, was the head of the  family  and\t the
\nmaster\tof  accused  4. The prosecution\t case  is  that\t one
\npetromax light was burning at the Otla of accused 3’s house.
\nIt is an admitted position that there was no electricity  in
\nthe village.  The further case of the prosecution is that on
\nhearing\t the complainant accused 3 lost his temper  and\t the
\nother  accused persons became very much excited.   The\tsaid
\naccused\t 3  then  shouted at accused 2\tAbdul  Ise  Suleman,
\nnamely,\t the appellant and asked him to bring guns from\t the
\nhouse.\t Accused 3 thereafter went to the house and  brought
\nthree  guns  and  gave one gun to each\tof  accused  1,\t and
\naccused 2 and accused 3, Haji Ise Suleman also kept one\t gun
\nfor  himself.\tAccused 2 gave a leather  wallet  containing
\ncartridges to accused 1 who distributed the said  cartridges
\nto  accused  2 and 3 and asked them to load  the  guns.\t  On
\nseeing\tthis  all  the said  four  witnesses  including\t the
\ncomplainant started
\n11<\/span>
\nrunning\t away from the house of accused 3. According to\t the
\ncomplainant,  the  injured witness, Gulam Musa\tMohmed,\t was
\nrunning behind them while the complainant Kalidas and  Abdul
\nHaq  were  running  ahead of Gulam.   When  the\t complainant
\nreached\t the shop of Sadik Mohmad, they saw Khoda Gulam,  PW
\n12, and Chandu Bechar, PW 13, standing there.  According  to
\nthe complainant, when they started running towards the\twest
\non  a  road  leading towards a khadki and  while  they\twere
\ncrossing  the Pir Chakla, they heard a sound of gunshot\t and
\nwhile  they were standing in the Naveri, Gulam, the  injured
\nwitness who was following them told them that he was injured
\nby  the gunshot on his left hand.   Immediately\t thereafter,
\nthey  heard  another  sound  of\t gunshot  coming  from\t the
\ndirection of the house of accused 3 and thereafter two\tmore
\nsounds were heard by them.  A big crowd gathered in front of
\nthe  house of one Abdul Mohmed Vilayati and the\t complainant
\nwent  near  the crowd and saw that his son Aiyub  was  lying
\nthere  injured by a gunshot on his head and shoulder and  on
\nexamining  him he found that his son was dead.\t The  police
\nHead Constable from the village outpost arrived there and he
\ntook the complainant to the police station where he gave his
\ncomplaint.    The   Head  Constable  thereafter\t  sent\t the
\ncomplainant and the injured person Gulam to Jambusar  Police
\nStation\t with  the complaint Ext. 32 and  according  to\t the
\nP.S.1.,\t M.K.  Chaudhari,  PW 19,  complainant,\t PW  8,\t and
\ninjured\t Gulam, PW 9 arrived at Jambusar Police\t Station  at
\nabout  0. 15 a.m. and the occurrence report and the  offence
\nwas registered.\t The police recorded the statement of  Gulam
\nand sent him to the hospital for medical treatment.  The PSI
\nthereafter  left  Jambusar  for village\t Tankari  where\t the
\nincident  had taken place and he reached the place at  about
\n1.30 a.m. and the complainant, PW 8, showed him the scene of
\noccurrence.  The PSI made search of the accused persons\t but
\nthey  could not be found in the village.  The  inquest\tover
\nthe dead body was held at about 2.15 a.m. and the  statement
\nof witnesses Kalidas, PW 10, Musa Mohmed, PW 14, Ibrahim, PW
\n15, and others were recorded at about 6.45 p.m. Panchnama of
\nthe scene of offence was prepared the next morning.   During
\nthe  search of the house of accused 3, a double-barrel\tgun,
\nArticle\t No.  6, was seized under Panchnama Ext.  21,  while
\nnothing incriminating was found from the house of accused  4
\nand  5. The statements of two eyewitnesses Khoda, PW 12\t and
\nChandu PW 13 were also recorded on the same day.  Ultimately
\nall the five accused persons presented themselves before the
\nPSI  at Jambusar Police Station and accused 3  produced\t the
\ngun licence, Article No. 11, accused 1 produced gun licence,
\nArticle\t No. 12 and a combined double-barrel bridge  loading
\nrifle, Article No. 13, and accused 2 produced a gun  licence
\nArticle\t No. 14 and a double-barrel rifle, Article  No.\t 15.
\nAll the said articles were attached under Panchnama.   After
\ncompletion  of the investigation, the accused  persons\twere
\ncharge-sheeted\tand  they were ultimately committed  to\t the
\ncourt of Sessions.\n<\/p>\n
4.   The postmortem was held on the body of the deceased and
\nthe  doctor  noted the injuries caused by  gunshot  and\t the
\ndoctor gave his opinion that the death was caused due to the
\ngunshot injuries and such injuries were sufficient to  cause
\ndeath  in  the\tordinary  course.  PW  9,  Gulam,  was\talso
\nexamined by the doctor at about 1. 10 a.m. in the very night
\nof  occurrence and the doctor noticed two  gunshot  injuries
\nand  the  said PW 9 was treated as indoor patient  for\tfive
\ndays.\n<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
5.   The  High\tCourt referred to a number of  decisions  of
\nthis  Court and noted the guiding principles  governing\t the
\nexercise of appellate jurisdiction of the High Court and the
\nduty  of the appellate court while dealing with an order  of
\nacquittal.   The  High Court has indicated that\t keeping  in
\nmind all the well-settled principles for deciding an  appeal
\nagainst\t an order of acquittal, the facts and  circumstances
\nof the case were taken into consideration by the High  Court
\nand  the  impugned judgment was delivered.  A  site  of\t the
\nplace  of occurrence being Ext. 10 was prepared by  Musabhai
\nValibhai, PW 1, and he proved the said site plan.  The\tHigh
\nCourt indicated in the judgment that all the important spots
\nin  the map had been carefully noticed by the High Court  in
\norder  to correctly appreciate the evidences adduced in\t the
\ncase.  It has been noted by the High Court that the distance
\nwhere the said young boy had died and the house of accused 3
\nwas  131  ft. or roughly about 43 to 44 yards only  and\t the
\nHigh  Court also noticed that all the prosecution  witnesses
\nand   the   accused   persons  were   present\twithin\t the
\ncircumference  of about 100 yards.  It also transpired\tfrom
\nthe  map  that\tthere were shops in  the  locality  and\t the
\nevidences also disclosed that shopkeepers also used to\tkeep
\npetromax  lanterns  in the shop and there was hotel  in\t the
\nlocality  and  it also transpired from\tthe  evidences\tthat
\nthere  was  petromax light even in the house of\t accused  3.
\nPanchnama  of  the scene of offence being  Ext.\t 16  clearly
\nindicates  that\t near Pir Chakla the house of  Abdul  Mohmed
\nVilayati  was situated and there was mud Otla of the  length
\nof  2 1\/2 feet from the door of his house.  Near the  place,
\nthere  was a pool of blood within an area of half foot.\t  It
\nwas also indicated in the Panchnama of the scene of  offence
\nthat  certain  cartridges  and pellets were  seized  by\t the
\npolice.\t  It  also transpires from the\tPanchnama  that\t the
\nhouse  of other witnesses were also situated near the  scene
\nof offence.  The High Court has noted that the\tcomplainant,
\nPW  8, stated in his deposition that one petromax light\t was
\nburning\t on  the  otla.\t He also stated that  there  was  no
\nelectric  light in the village and all the shopkeepers\tused
\nto  keep petromax lantern.  He also stated that\t on  hearing
\nthe  complaint\tof these four persons, accused\t3  lost\t his
\ntemper\tand  all the accused persons were excited.   It\t has
\nalso  been noted by the High Court that although  an  effort
\nwas made in the cross-examination of the said complainant to
\nsuggest\t that there was enmity between the said\t complainant
\nand the accused but such suggestion in the cross-examination
\nwas  denied  by the said witness.  The said witness  in\t his
\ncross-examination  stated that although the injured  witness
\nGulam  had told him that it was the gun of accused  1  which
\ncaused\tinjuries  to the said Gulam but such  fact  was\t not
\nstated\tby  the\t complainant when he  lodged  the  complaint
\nbefore\tthe  Police Constable.\tThe  said  complainant\talso
\nstated in his cross-examination that Khoda PW 12 and  Chandu
\nPW  13 had told him that they had seen shot from the gun  of
\naccused 1 injuring Gulam PW 9 and other gunshot from accused
\n2 hitting his son.  The said witness further stated that  he
\ncould  not give the details in the complaint because he\t was
\ntoo  excited and frightened.  The complainant, PW 8,  denied
\nthe suggestion that Khoda PW 12 and Chandu PW 13 were got up
\nwitnesses.   The High Court has noted that the\tcomplainant,
\nshortly after the incident, lodged the complaint before\t the
\npolice and the names of all the witnesses were mentioned  in
\nthe  complaint.\t  The  High Court has also  noted  that\t the
\ndeposition  of\tthe complainant tallies with  the  complaint
\nmade  by him.  The High Court has further founded that PW  9
\nGulam  who  was\t an  injured  witness  also  supported\t the
\nprosecution case.  The High Court has further noted that
\n13<\/span>
\nreading\t the  entire cross-examination of the  said  injured
\nwitness,  it can be noticed that there was no  contradiction
\nin  his\t deposition.  The High Court, after  indicating\t the
\nreasons\t in detail, has come to the finding that the  entire
\nevidence of the injured witness PW 9 is trustworthy and\t the
\nwitness\t has  stated truth.  The High Court has\t also  taken
\ninto consideration the evidence of two eyewitnesses Khoda PW
\n12 and Chandu PW 13 and according to the High Court the said
\neyewitnesses were natural and their names were mentioned  in
\nthe  complaint Ext. 32, which was lodged shortly  after\t the
\nincident.   After referring to the site map, the High  Court
\nhas  come to the finding that both the said  witnesses\twere
\nvery much present at the shop of Sadik Mohmed and the  place
\nwhere  the boy had been shot dead was close from  the  place
\nwhere  the said witnesses were present.\t The High Court\t has
\nnoted that from the evidence of PW 12, it transpires that at
\nthe  relevant time accused 1, 2 and 3 were holding guns\t and
\nhe heard a gunshot being fired from the gun of accused 1 and
\nhe noticed that Gulam was injured by that gunshot.  He\talso
\ndeposed\t that  after some time accused 2 fired his  gun\t and
\nthat shot hit Aiyub who was standing on the otla of  accused
\n3  and being hit by the gunshot Aiyub had fallen down.\t The
\nHigh  Court  has held that the evidence of  PW\t12  inspires
\nconfidence  and\t his  presence at the  said  spot,  for\t the
\nreasons disclosed by the said witness, was acceptable.\t The
\nHigh Court has also noted that the evidence of PW 12  stands
\ncorroborated  by the Panchnama of scene of offence  inasmuch
\nas  the\t deceased  had fallen down just near  the  house  of
\nMohmed\tVilayati.  The High Court has also noted that PW  12
\nhad no oblique motive against the accused persons.  The High
\nCourt  has also noted that no contradiction worth  the\tname
\ncould  be brought by the defence to destroy the\t credibility
\nof  the said witness.  The High Court has also\treferred  to
\nthe  evidence  of Chandu PW 13 and has come to\tthe  finding
\nthat  he was a natural witness and his evidence also  stands
\ncorroborated  by the evidence of the injured Gulam and\talso
\nthe  evidence  of witness PW 12.  The High Court  has  noted
\nthat  although\tPW 13 did not state before the\tpolice\tthat
\nthere  was petromax light but non-mention of  such  petromax
\nlight\twas  insignificant  omission  and  the\t substantive
\nevidence  should  not be discarded for such  omission.\t The
\nHigh  Court  has also referred to the deposition  of  PW  15
\nIbrahim\t Ismail.  The shop of the said witness\tis  situated
\njust  near  Pir Chakla and opposite to spot ‘B’ in  the\t map
\nwhere the young boy had died.  It has been noted by the High
\nCourt  that  the evidence of PW 15 has\tclearly\t established
\nthat at 5.00 p.m. accused 4 had given a shoe beating on\t the
\nhead  of  Master and at about 8.00 p.m. on the same  day  he
\nheard two or three gunshots.\n<\/p>\n
6.The High Court, has also analysed the reasons indicated
\nby  the\t trial court for giving an order  of  acquittal\t and
\nafter  indicating its own reasonings the High Court came  to
\nthe  finding  that such reasonings of the  learned  Sessions
\nJudge were against the weight of the evidences and could not
\nbe accepted.  The High Court has also held that the incident
\nhad  happened  at  about  8.30 p.m.  when  the\tson  of\t the
\ncomplainant  had  died.\t The complaint was lodged  at  about
\n10.30  p.m  It has been held by the High Court that  if\t the
\ngrief-stricken\tfather had lodged the complaint\t within\t two
\nhours from the time of the incident, it cannot be  contended
\nthat there was unreasonable delay thereby raising  suspicion
\nabout  cooking up of a false case.  The High Court has\talso
\ncome  to the finding that non-mention of petromax  light  in
\nthe  complaint\tlodged\tby the poor  father  can  be  easily
\nexplained because the father was under a great shock and  it
\nwas quite likely that
\n14<\/span>
\nhe  had omitted to mention about the petromax light in\tthat
\nstate of mind.\tThe High Court has also come to the  finding
\nthat although accused 2 might have not intended to kill\t the
\nyoung boy aged 10 years but the provision under Section\t 301
\nIPC  is clearly attracted in the facts and circumstances  of
\nthe case.\n<\/p>\n
7.In  view of the aforesaid findings, the High Court  set
\naside the order of acquittal passed by the learned  Sessions
\nJudge  and  held that accused 1 was guilty for\tthe  offence
\npunishable under Section 324 IPC for causing injury to PW  9
\nGulam  with  a gun and appellant 2 was held  guilty  for  an
\noffence\t punishable under Section 302 read with Section\t 301
\nIPC  for causing the death of the son of the complainant  PW\n<\/p>\n
8.  In\tthat view of the matter, the High Court\t passed\t the
\nsentence of life imprisonment against the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
8.The  learned\tcounsel for the appellant  has\tsubmitted
\nthat  the prosecution story does not inspire  confidence  on
\nthe  face  of  it.  It has been\t contended  by\tthe  learned
\ncounsel\t that it is unusual and not expected  normally\tthat
\nthe  complainant  and his companions would  wait  even\twhen
\naccused\t 3,  a\trich and influential man  in  the  locality,
\nbecame highly agitated along with other accused persons\t and
\nordered\t for bringing guns from the house to teach a  lesson
\nto the complainant and his associates.\tIn any event, it  is
\nabsolutely  improbable\tthat when actually three  guns\twere
\nbrought\t to  the  otla of accused 3  and  wallet  containing
\ncartridges  were  also\tbrought,  the  complainant  and\t his
\nassociates  would still wait there and see the\tdistribution
\nof  cartridges\tand  only thereafter they  would  leave\t the
\nplace.\tThe learned counsel has also contended that it is an
\nadmitted  position that there was no electric light  in\t the
\nlocality and in the First information Report the complainant
\ndid not mention about any petromax light burning in the otla
\nof accused 3. He has also not mentioned about petromax light
\nbeing  used by the hotel or other shopkeepers.\tThe  mention
\nof petromax light at a later stage was a clear embellishment
\nand the learned Sessions Judge was justified in disbelieving
\nthe  existence\tof  sufficient light  in  view\tof  petromax
\nlantern burning there.\tIt has been contended by the learned
\ncounsel for the appellant that if strong light was not there
\nin  the otla of accused 1 or near about the place where\t the
\nboy was shot dead and PW 9 Gulam had sustained injuries,  it
\nwas  not  possible for any of the witnesses to see  who\t had
\nactually  fired the gun.  Admittedly, there were three\tguns
\nbrought from the house and admittedly all the said guns were
\nloaded.\t  In the aforesaid circumstances, unless it  can  be
\nclearly\t pinpointed as to which of the accused had  actually
\nfired the gun causing the death of the said boy, it was\t not
\npossible to convict the appellant on a charge of murder.\n<\/p>\n
9.The  learned counsel has also contended that\twhen  the
\ncomplainant  and his associates were running away  from\t the
\notla  being frightened by the fact that the three guns\twere
\nloaded by the accused persons, it was not expected that they
\nshould\ttry to look as to what the accused had\tbeen  doing.
\nIn  the\t aforesaid  circumstances, it  would  be  a  natural
\ntendency  of  the complainant and his associates to  run  as
\nfast as possible in order to save their lives.\tThe  learned
\ncounsel\t has submitted that although the High Court, in\t its
\njudgment  has noticed the guiding principle in dealing\twith
\nthe  order  of acquittal by the appellate  court,  but\tsuch
\nprinciples  have not been followed by the High\tCourt.\t The
\nlearned\t counsel  has submitted that  the  learned  Sessions
\nJudge  has given very cogent reasons for basing his  finding
\nthat  the prosecution case could not be\t established  beyond
\nreasonable doubt.  According to the learned counsel for the
\n15<\/span>
\nappellant such finding is consistent with the evidence\t and
\nthe  learned Sessions Judge having taken a reasonable  view,
\nthe  High Court was not justified to make a  reappraisal  of
\nthe  evidences\tadduced in the case for\t making\t independent
\nfinding\t of  its own and to set aside  proper  and  reasoned
\norder  of acquittal.  The learned counsel for the  appellant
\nhas  further  submitted\t that in any event,  the  facts\t and
\ncircumstances  of  the case and the depositions led  by\t the
\nprosecution  do\t not establish that the\t appellant  had\t any
\nintention to commit murder of an innocent boy aged ten years
\nwith  whom there was no question of having any\t  enmity  or
\nany occasion to take a revenge.\t Even if from the  evidence,
\nit  is\tpossible  to  hold that the  gunshot  taken  by\t the
\nappellant  ultimately caused the death of a boy,  the  court
\nmust  hold that such death was absolutely unintentional\t and
\nat  best  it  can be held that such firing was\ta  rash\t and
\nnegligent  action  on the part of the  appellant.   In\tthat
\nevent, the offence committed by the appellant cannot be held
\nto  be a murder under Section 302 read with Section 301\t IPC
\nas held by the High Court but an offence under Section 304-A
\nIPC.   The learned counsel has further submitted that if  an
\nold man aged about 80 years had been given a shoe beating on
\nthe  head  by accused 4 who was the servant  of\t accused  3,
\nthere  was no occasion for the accused 3 to lose  temper  if
\nhis  attention\twas  drawn to  such  improper  behaviour  of
\naccused\t 4.  The  learned counsel  has\tsubmitted  that\t the
\nprosecution case was false and the truth was not told by the
\nprosecution  witnesses.\t He has submitted that\tthe  learned
\nSessions  Judge\t has   rightly held that it is\tlikely\tthat
\nthere  was  some  incident in the afternoon  for  which\t two
\ngroups had fought and it was only in the cross fire a  young
\nboy  was  shot dead and one of the witnesses  had  sustained
\ninjuries.   The\t learned counsel has,  therefore,  submitted
\nthat  the improper order of conviction and  sentence  passed
\nagainst the appellant should be set aside by this Court\t and
\nthe appellant should be acquitted.\n<\/p>\n
10.Such\t contention is, however, disputed by  the  learned
\ncounsel\t for  the State and it has been submitted  that\t the
\nprosecution  case  was\tfully established  by  reliable\t and
\nclinching  evidences  and  the\toffence\t of  murder  by\t the
\nappellant  has been proved by a number of eyewitnesses.\t  It
\nhas  been  submitted that tile High Court has  analysed\t the
\ndepositions  of eyewitnesses and has clearly held  that\t the
\ndeposition  of each of the eyewitnesses stands\tcorroborated
\nby  the site plan and medical evidence and such\t depositions
\nare absolutely reliable.  The High Court has also held\tthat
\nPWs 12 and 13 were natural witnesses and they had no  animus
\nagainst any of the accused persons and their evidences\twere
\nabsolutely   trustworthy.    He\t has  submitted\t  that\t the
\nreasonings  of\tthe learned Sessions Judge have\t been  taken
\ninto consideration by the High Court and by indicating\tvery
\ncogent\treasons, the same has been discarded.  Hence,  there
\nis no occasion to interfere with the order of conviction and
\nsentence passed against the appellant and the appeal  should
\nbe dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
11.After   giving   our\t careful  consideration\t  to   the
\nrespective  submissions made by the learned counsel for\t the
\nparties\t and considering the facts and circumstances of\t the
\ncase  and  evidences  on record, we have  no  hesitation  in
\nholding\t that the order of acquittal passed by\tthe  learned
\nSessions Judge against the appellant was wholly\t unjustified
\nand against the weight of the evidence adduced in the  case.
\nIn   the  instant  case,  apart\t from  the  depositions\t  of
\ncomplainant and his companions who had been to the house  of
\naccused\t 3 to lodge protest against the assault made on\t the
\nsaid old man, there are convincing
\n16<\/span>
\nevidences  of two independent eyewitnesses, namely,  PWs  12
\nand 13.\t In our view, the High Court is justified in holding
\nthat PWs 12 and 13 are natural witnesses and their evidences
\nare  absolutely reliable and the same get  corroboration  by
\nthe evidences given by other eyewitnesses and also from\t the
\ninjuries suffered by the deceased and the injured person and
\nthe  site plan prepared for the case.  The reason  given  by
\nthe complainant for not mentioning the existence of petromax
\nlantern\t in  the  complaint  before  the  police  is   quite
\nconvincing  and natural.  The complainant has stated in\t his
\ndeposition that he was greatly shocked by the wanton act  of
\nkilling\t of his son and he was also nervous when  he  lodged
\nthe  complaint\tto  the police and  therefore,\the  did\t not
\nmention\t the presence of petromax light.  There is  positive
\nevidence that the shopkeepers used to keep petromax  lantern
\nand  in the otla of accused 1 a petromax light was  burning.
\nIn  our view, the High Court has given very  cogent  reasons
\nfor  holding  that the appellant was guilty of\tthe  offence
\nunder  Section 302 read with Section 301 IPC.  The  gun\t was
\nnot  fired in the air just to frighten the  complainant\t and
\nhis  companions\t but  the gun was  fired  by  the  appellant
\ntowards\t fleeing persons even when by the first shot one  of
\nsuch persons was injured.  Such firing was resorted to in  a
\nlocality where there were number of shops.  Accordingly, the
\nprovision  of  Section 301 IPC is clearly attracted  in\t the
\nfacts and circumstances of the case.  We, therefore, find no
\nreason to take a contrary view in the case and to upset\t the
\nwell-reasoned  judgment\t of the High  Court  convicting\t the
\nappellant.   The appeal, therefore, fails and is  dismissed.
\nThe  appellant was released on bail during the\tpendency  of
\nthe appeal.  He should, therefore, be taken into custody  to
\nserve out the sentence.\n<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994 Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR 1910, 1994 SCC Supl. (2) 9 Author: G Ray Bench: Ray, G.N. (J) PETITIONER: ABDUL ISE SULEMAN Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF GUJARAT DATE OF JUDGMENT14\/02\/1994 BENCH: RAY, G.N. (J) BENCH: RAY, G.N. (J) REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-227685","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nAbdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1994-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-17T10:52:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994\",\"datePublished\":\"1994-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-17T10:52:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994\"},\"wordCount\":4309,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994\",\"name\":\"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1994-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-17T10:52:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1994-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-17T10:52:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994","datePublished":"1994-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-17T10:52:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994"},"wordCount":4309,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994","name":"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1994-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-17T10:52:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-ise-suleman-vs-state-of-gujarat-on-14-february-1994#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Abdul Ise Suleman vs State Of Gujarat on 14 February, 1994"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/227685","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=227685"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/227685\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=227685"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=227685"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=227685"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}