Case Ruling
The Telangana High Court has reduced the sentences of several accused in an unlawful assembly case under Section 302 of the IPC. The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove a ‘common object’ among the mob, making each individual responsible for their own actions.
Background of the Case
The case involved a violent protest by villagers of Gouraram Village over surplus forest land. During the commotion, a forest official lost his life. Initially, all the accused were convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder.
Prosecution’s Argument
The prosecution claimed that the accused, as part of an unlawful assembly, were collectively responsible for the crime. It relied on Section 149 IPC, which holds all members of an unlawful assembly accountable for offenses committed in pursuit of a common object.
Defense’s Argument
The defense argued that no accused were named in the FIR. They contended that no test identification parade was conducted to confirm the accused’s presence at the scene. They also pointed out that charges against most of the accused were based only on recoveries made at their instance.
Court’s Observations
The Division Bench of Justice K. Surender and Justice E.V. Venugopal ruled that the prosecution failed to establish any prior assembly that indicated a common object. The court observed that specific allegations applied only to A1 and A2, while it found no direct links between the other accused and the act.
Final Verdict
The court upheld A1’s conviction under Section 302 IPC for striking the deceased with an axe.
It reduced A2’s charge to Section 326 IPC and lowered his sentence to 5 years.
The court also convicted the other accused under Section 324 IPC and sentenced them to 3 years.
Conclusion
The ruling reinforces the principle that unlawful assembly convictions require clear evidence of a shared objective. The Telangana High Court’s decision ensures that individuals are held accountable for their specific actions rather than presumed guilty due to group involvement. The case sets an important precedent in interpreting Section 149 IPC.
