SC: Mere delay in filing of the report/FIR shall not lead to the acquittal of the accused or weaken the case of the prosecution

The Apex Court on 28.01.2019, in Satya Raj Singh  v  State of Madhya, dismissed the appeal  that had been made against  the High Court of Madhya Pradesh’s final judgment and order where the Division Bench of the High Court had  dismissed  the appeal while upholding  Additional  Sessions Judge’s judgment ,  wherein the appellant was held  guilty of offences   under   Section   302/34   of   the IPC, 1860  while being sentenced  of undergoing life imprisonment as well as  fine of Rs.1000/­followed by    rigorous   imprisonment   for   a period of months in case of default in  fine.

FACTS:

 The three accused persons had been prosecuted for the commission of murder of a person under Section 302/34 IPC. The Appellant was held guilty for the commission of the offences under   Section   302/34   IPC  by the Additional Sessions Judge while being sentenced imprisonment for life while the other two were acquitted. Being grieved, an appeal had been by the Appellant before the High Court of  Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur. However, no appeal had been made against the Additional Sessions Judge’s order wherein the other two accused were acquitted, making the acquittal order final. Subsequently, the appeal had to face dismissal at the hands of the High Court, resulting in an appeal by special leave was made in the Apex Court.

DECISION HELD BY THE APEX COURT:

The Apex Court while dismissing the appeal upheld the the High Court‘s order of    conviction against the appellant as the evidence cited by prosecution was beyond any reasonable doubt, further quashing the contention raised by the appellant regarding the delay while filing   the FIR by opining that it was impossible to form the part of the complainant to visit the   Police Station that   very far away from the site of occurrence immediately in that night for lodging of the report/FIR.

Judgment:

[embeddoc url=”https://www.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2012/25895/25895_2012_Judgement_28-Jan-2019.pdf” download=”all”]