Section 149 IPC| 'Common Object' Needs To Be Established To Charge All Individuals For Being Part Of Unlawful Assembly: Telangana HC

“It cannot be said that all the accused gathered with the common object of killing the deceased. Several villagers, other than the appellants have attacked the vehicles and other officers. In the said situation, when it was accused No.1, who had attacked the deceased with an axe, the common object of all the appellants cannot be inferred. The appellants, other than accused Nos.1 and 2, were convicted on the basis of recoveries effected at their instance. None of the witnesses attributed any specific overt-acts to other appellants apart from accused Nos.1 and 2”

The order was passed by a Division Bench of Justice K. Surender and Justice E.V. Venugopal in a batch of criminal appeals filed in the year 2018, where all the appellants were convicted under section 302, for the alleged murder of a forest official.

According to the complainant (another forest official), the incident occurred when the villagers of the Gouraram Village held a protest outside the forest office for the allotment of surplus forest land for cultivation. When the forest officials arrived on site, the mob turned violent and started to attack the officials. In the commotion, the deceased forest official lost his life.

Within a span of three hours, a complaint was registered and the officials who were still in shock, could not identify the individuals of the mob in the complaint. However, when investigation and trial were conducted, depositions were given against A1 and A2, who alleged to have hit the deceased with an axe and a stick, respectively, causing his death. Charges against the other accused were laid based on the recoveries made.

Owing to section 149, which states that all members of an unlawful assembly are guilty of any offence if the common object is proved; the trial court convicted all accused of section 302 of the IPC.

The trial court order was appealed against, giving rise to the present appeal.

The counsel for the appellants contended that none of the names of the accused were mentioned in the FIR and even after investigation, no test identification parade was conducted to confirm that the individuals charged were in fact the ones who held the unlawful assembly.

The Division bench scrapped this argument, holding that the officials were in contact with the villagers on a daily basis, and in such a situation no test identification parade was required. The High Court noted, however, that most of the depositions given by witnesses to the incident were against A1 and A2.

Further, the Court, relying on Vijay Pandurang Thakre v. State of Maharashtra noted that the prosecution had failed to establish any prior assembly, which gave rise to a common object. Thus held, that each accused would be responsible for their own actions.

The conviction against A1 was upheld on account of him hitting the deceased on the head with an axe, leading to his death. The sentence against A2 was reduced to Section 326 and his incarceration time was reduced to 5 years. The remaining accused were directed to be convicted under Section 324 and undergo incarceration for a period of 3 years.

With those observations, the appeals were disposed of.

Gandala Laxman vs the State of TS and Batch.

Counsel for appellants: R. Prasanth

Counsel for respondents: Shalini Saxena (APP)

Click Here To Read/Download The Order