Susanta Das & Ors Vs. State of Orissa
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 149
Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - Section 149 IPC refers to participation of each member of an unlawful assembly, it has to be necessarily shown that there was an assembly of five or more persons, which is designated as unlawful assembly under Section 149 I.P.C. - It is not necessary that there must be specific overt act played by each of the member of such an unlawful assembly in the commission of an offence - What is required to be shown is the participation as a member in pursuance of a common object of the assembly or being a member of that assembly, such person knew as to what is likely to be committed in prosecution of any such common object - In the event of the proof of showing of either of the above conduct of a member of an unlawful assembly, the offence, as stipulated in Section 149, will stand proved.
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 , Section 307 , Section 149
Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - Based on the medical evidence as well as the injured eye witnesses account to show how the appellants revealed their common object in the course of their participation when the deceased and the injured witnesses were inflicted with serious injuries with the aid of deadly weapons - Consequently none of the accused could escape from the invocation of Section 149 I.P.C. in the murder of the deceased falling under Section 302 I.P.C. as well as the grievous injuries caused on P.Ws.8 and 11.
Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - Delay in forwarding FIR Magistrate -High Court was conscious of the said fact and has made a specific reference to the said fact and it ultimately held that there was no material on record to show or suggest that the F.I.R was tampered or it was fabricated at a later date by antedating it or the delay in sending the F.I.R by P.W.3 or the delay in placing it before SDJM by the Sub Inspector of Police or the delay in signing the F.I.R by SDJM on 06.04.1996 was so very vital to doubt the case of the prosecution - Said view expressed by the Division Bench fully concurred.
Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - Implication of all the five accused was perfectly justified and was supported by legal evidence as was spoken to by the relevant witnesses which was duly corroborated by the medical evidence - Held that mere non mentioning of two of the names in the F.I.R cannot be fatal to the case of the prosecution.
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 , Section 326 , Section 307 , Section 148 , Section 149
Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - Murder - A cumulative consideration of the evidence of P.Ws.1, 7, 8 and 11 amply disclose that there were five who were involved in the occurrence, viz., accused 1 to 4 and accused-'A' apart from the specific role played by each one of them - Having regard to the motive related to which the appellants stated to have nurtured a grievance which resulted in the assault on the deceased and P.Ws.8 and 11 - All of whom being known to the injured eye witnesses and accused-'A' being known to P.W.7, there is no reason to disbelieve their version -Held that the involvement and the extent of participation by the appellants has been sufficiently established by the prosecution with the required evidence.
Topic(s)-Murder - Common object established