AMAR SINGH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P.
LAWS(SC)-2014-7-1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on July 01,2014

AMAR SINGH YADAV Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

VIKAS YADAV AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2015-2-237] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. IMDAD ALI WAID ALI SAYYAD [LAWS(BOM)-2016-4-53] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK PRAJAPATI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2014-12-54] [REFERRED TO]
MITHLESH KUMAR KUSHWAHA VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2015-9-421] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. BHAVAN BHIKHUBHAI SODHA [LAWS(GJH)-2018-6-71] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. USTAB ALI [LAWS(CAL)-2020-3-66] [REFERRED TO]
AHMED SAYEED VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2022-1-27] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)These appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 16th February, 2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No.1942 of 2009 and Reference No.5 of 2009. By the impugned common judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 302, 307 and 436 IPC and thereby answered the Reference in confirming the death sentence.
(2.)The case of the prosecution in short is that Urmila Devi was married to accused Amar Singh Yadav, who was posted as Constable in Police Chowki Gurdev Palace, Kanpur. Three daughters, Mamta, aged 24 years; Pooja aged 22 years; and Sudha 18 years and one son, Pankaj Yadav, aged 13 years were born from their wedlock. Amar Singh had developed illicit relationship with two other women, namely, Shashi of Kanpur and Rani of Bharthana, causing differences in the family. Urmila got effected deduction of half salary of the accused from the Department directly to pull on the expenses of the family. On account of such deductions of salary and illicit relationship, the accused became determined to cause the death of his wife, Urmila and all four children. Pursuant to that determination, accused along with companion driving the Maruti Van No.UP 78 C 8262 came to his wife Urmila and he had taken away his wife and four children in Maruti Van on the pretention of doing shopping for the marriage of one of the daughters. Further case of the prosecution is that when the sun had set, at the time of return the accused got Maruti Van stopped 25-30 metres ahead of Udharanpur bridge on Jahanganj road and he along with the driver came out of the Van. They sprinkled the petrol all around the Van after locking the doors thereof. The accused along with companion then set the Maruti Van ablaze, with intention of burning all occupants of the Maruti Van to death. Thereafter, the accused and the driver tried to push the vehicle down in the pit so that the occupants might not escape but meanwhile Inspector, Police Station Chhibramau along his companion Police Constables luckily arrived there and he without caring of his life broke open the doors of the burning vehicle and took out accused's wife and all four children from the burning car. He immediately removed them to the Hospital for treatment. The complainant having received the information, rushed to Lohia Hospital, Farrukhabad where sister of the complainant i.e. Urmila and four children briefed the entire incident to him.
(3.)Dhruv Narain, Constable Police No.286 (PW-14), registered the First Information Report at 1.30 a.m. being Crime No.310/2005 under Section 436, 307 IPC. He received direction from Inspector Uma Shankar Yadav on R.T. Set to depute the additional force. On this, Sub-Inspector Pramod Kumar Katiyar along with other Constables proceeded to the spot. The next day at about 7.20 a.m., Sub-Inspector Pramod Kumar Katiyar returned to the Police Station; vide General Diary it is reported that he got admitted all the injured of the incident in Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital on the direction of Inspector, Uma Shankar Yadav.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.