Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024) - Case Analysis

Introduction of Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024)

Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024) case analysed important principles of criminal liability under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). In this case, the Appellant Sandeep was convicted for the murder of Abdul Hameed under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of the IPC. The Supreme Court on 14th October, 2024 confirmed the conviction for murder and overturned the application of Section 34 IPC.

Download Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand 2024 PDF

Why in the Spotlight? - Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024)

The Supreme Court in this case upheld the conviction for murder under Section 302 but set aside the charge of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case focused on the offences of murder and common intention.

Historical Context and Facts of Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024)

The case at hand involves the Appellant who was convicted under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 while the other accused were acquitted by the Sessions Court. The following are the brief facts of the case -

Incident of Murder

On the night of 30th October, 1997, the Appellant Sandeep along with Veer Singh, Mintu, and Dharamveer arrived at the house of Abdul Hameed and confronted him. The confrontation arose from refusal of Abdul Hameed to provide jaggery (GUR) to the accused. During the altercation, the Appellant Sandeep shot Abdul Hameed and caused fatal injuries.

Witness Accounts

Kale Hasan, son of Abdul Hameed, Gufran Ali and Naseem after hearing the gun shots rushed to the crime scene and saw the accused absconding. They took Abdul Hameed to the Government Hospital in Laksar where he was declared dead.

Filing of FIR

The Complainant Kale Hasan on 31st October, 1997 submitted a written report at the Laksar Police Station and registered a case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Investigation

The investigation involved -

• an on-site examination by the investigating officer
• preparation of an inquest report
• recovery of evidence which includes a country-made pistol and an empty cartridge which the appellant pointed out during the investigation. 

Dr. R.K. Verma who conducted the post-mortem determined the cause of death to be firearm injuries.

Decision of the Sessions Court

The Sessions Court after examining the facts and evidence and testimonies of the case convicted the Appellant, Sandeep under Section 302 IPC and acquitted the other accused. The Sessions Court sentenced the Appellant to life imprisonment.

Appeal in High Court of Nainital

Aggrieved by the decision of the Sessions Court, the Appellant Sandeep approached the High Court of Nainital. However, the Nainital High Court upheld the decision of the Sessions Court.

Appeal in the Supreme Court

The Appellant Sandeep approached the Supreme Court and challenged the decision of the High Court of Nainital.

Issue addressed in Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024)

The main questions which were addressed in this case were -

• Whether the conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was justified especially when the co-accused were acquitted?
• Whether the benefit of doubt should have been extended to Appellant?
• Whether there were discrepancies in the witness testimonies that could affect the conviction?

Legal Provisions involved in Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024)

In the Supreme Court Judgement of Sandeep case 2024 Section 34 and Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 played a significant role. The following are the analysis of the provisions -

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 34 of the Code deals with Common Intention (Now Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023). It provides When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 302 of the Code provides punishment for murder (Now Section 103 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023). It states that whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

Judgment and Impact of Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024)

The Supreme Court after analysing the facts and circumstances in Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024) confirmed the conviction of Sandeep under Section 302 Indian Penal Code.

The Supreme Court regarding Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code referred to the State of U.P. vs. M.K. Anthony (1985) and State of Rajasthan vs. Om Prakash (2007) and clarified that a common intention among the accused must be proven to apply the charge of Section 34 IPC. The Court observed that the evidence presented did not support the claim of common intention. The Court also ruled that they found no basis to hold Sandeep solely liable under Section 34 IPC since the co-accused had been acquitted.

The Court acknowledged the good conduct of Sandeep during his incarceration and reduced his sentence to the period already served, approximately 17 years. The Court ordered the Appellant Sandeep to be released immediately but subject to payment of the fine imposed by the Sessions Court.

Conclusion

In Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand (2024), the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Sandeep under Section 302 IPC based on credible evidence but dismissed the charge under Section 34 IPC. The Court reduced the sentence of Sandeep to the period already served and ordered his immediate release.