Presence Of Accused As Part Of Unlawful Assembly Sufficient For Conviction Even If No Overt Act Is Imputed To Each Individually: Supreme Court

The appeals before the Apex Court were preferred by four accused/convicts sentenced to life imprisonment in a murder case.

The Division Bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti held, “It is settled in law that in view of Section 149 IPC, every member of the unlawful assembly is vicariously liable for acts done by anyone of them to achieve a common object. Therefore, two things are essential to attract Section 149 IPC. The first is “unlawful assembly” and the second is “common object”. The presence of the accused persons as part of the unlawful assembly is sufficient for conviction even if no overt act is imputed to each one of them individually. In the case at hand, all the accused persons had alighted from the bus together armed with firearms, thus, they were part of the unlawful assembly and had arrived at the bus stand with a common object.”

AOR S. Mahendran represented the Appellant while Advocate Shreeyash U. Lalit represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The incident dates back to the year 2000, when six accused persons alighted from a bus armed with firearms. Vikram was alleged to have a mouser; Govind Singh (now deceased) was present with a double-barreled 12-bore gun; Vinod @ Ajay with a single-barreled 12-bore gun; and the other three with country-made pistols (kattas). It was alleged that Vikram fired the first shot from behind a standing tractor trolley, which hit the deceased Balkishan, who was the Chairman of the Watershed Committee, in his left hand. On being hit, the deceased ran towards the village to save his life. He was chased by all the accused persons who kept on firing continuously.

The deceased entered the house of one Rattan Lal (PW-6). The accused persons followed him inside the house, dragged him to the courtyard, and shot him at the temple at point-blank range. The deceased died instantly. All the accused persons were convicted and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and for life under Sections 148 and 302,149 of the Indian Penal Code. They were acquitted of the charges under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The aforesaid conviction and sentence were upheld by the High Court, and the appeals preferred by the appellants were dismissed. Out of the six accused persons, one of the accused persons had died earlier, and the main accused, Vikram, remained absconding.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the ocular evidence of the brother of the deceased, who lodged the first information report, the Bench noted that the same was proof of the fact that there was a long-standing political enmity between the families of the main accused Vikram and the deceased Balkishan. The wives of both of them had contested the panchayat election from two different political parties in the year 1994, wherein the wife of the deceased defeated the wife of the main accused.

“The said ocular evidence stands supported by the other witnesses PW-5 and PW-7, one being the brother of the deceased, the Bench noted that the main accused Vikram had a long-standing rivalry with the deceased and, thus, had the motive to kill him”, it added.

It was the consistent evidence of the witnesses that on the fateful day, the main accused Vikram and the other accused persons arrived at the bus stand with firearms. “The very fact that all of them came together armed with firearms clearly proves that they were part of the unlawful assembly and had a common motive. Therefore, the provision of Section 149 IPC are clearly attracted, and even if any one of them had not committed an overt act, they are vicariously liable for the death of the deceased Balkishan. It may also be noted that the evidence on record proves that after the first shot was fired at the deceased at the bus stand by the main accused Vikram, all of them chased the deceased to the house of Rattan Lal (PW-6) where a number of shots were fired which were heard by the independent witness Rattan Lal (PW-6). This in itself proves that all of them were involved in the incident”, it noted.

The Bench thus held that the presence of the accused persons in the unlawful assembly to achieve a common object made all of them vicariously liable for the acts of the unlawful assembly. Considering that the main accused Vikram is still absconding, the Bench held that he is trying to escape for the simple reason that in his subconscious mind, he accepts himself to be guilty of the commission of the offence along with his accomplices. As per the Bench, the other accused were accomplices of him and were part of the unlawful assembly, who had arrived at the bus stand fully armed, thus having a common intention.

Referring to the postmortem report, the Bench noted that the doctor was of the clear opinion that all the injuries were caused by firearms and were sufficient to cause death. “Simply for the reason that the doctor could not confirm if the injuries received by the deceased were from one weapon or multiple weapons does not make any difference so as to discard his evidence in entirety”, it added.

Thus, dismissing the appeals and confirming the conviction of the appellants, the Bench directed them to surrender forthwith to undergo the remaining part of the sentence as they were on bail.

Cause Title: Dablu Etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 224)

Appearance

Appellant: AOR S. Mahendran, Advocate Prafulla Kumar Behera, AOR S. S. Nehra, Advocates Sanjay Singh, Deepak Jyoti Ghildiyal, Neeraj Dutt Gaur, Vikrant Nehra, Chetan Sharma

Respondent: Advocate Shreeyash U. Lalit, AOR Pashupathi Nath Razdan, Advocates Maitreyee Jagat Joshi, Astik Gupta, Akanksha Tomar

Click here to read/download Judgment