Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

JamaluddIn and ors. Vs. Emperor

JamaluddIn and ors. vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jun 14, 1923
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/482345

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

First Information Report, nature and value of - Contradictory statement on oath--Court, whether can rely ex report for conviction. - - The learned Judge has come to the definite conclusion that the evidence on both sides is wholly unreliable. 'as the witnesses on both sides are unreliable there remains only the r...

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

JamaluddIn and ors.

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1924All164; 74Ind.Cas.716

Excerpt

first information report, nature and value of - contradictory statement on oath--court, whether can rely ex report for conviction. - - the learned judge has come to the definite conclusion that the evidence on both sides is wholly unreliable. 'as the witnesses on both sides are unreliable there remains only the reports on which to base any definite conclusion.ryves, j.1. that a riot took place about sunset in the village of rawatpur on the 22nd of january last in which one abid ali unfortunately was fatally injured is established beyond doubt. ten men were sent up for trial under sections 147 and 304 of the indian penal code to the court of session at shahjahanpur. the learned judge has convicted three of them and these have appealed. the learned judge has come to the definite conclusion that the evidence on both sides is wholly unreliable. he says: 'as the witnesses on both sides are unreliable there remains only the reports on which to base any definite conclusion.' this is not a legitimate use of a first information report. such reports are not subst native evidence of the facts recorded in them and a conviction cannot be based on a report. they can be used to corroborate the witnesses who made them and are of value as showing that they told the same story at the first possible occasion. if they told a different story in court, the first report can be used to contradict them or discredit their testimony. but it is not legitimate for a. court when witnesses tell a different story in the witness-box and contradict the report made by them to discard the evidence given on oath and to rely on the report. the result probably is that there has been a miscarriage of justice in this case, but that is not the fault of the court but of the complainants themselves and their witnesses. if they choose to suppress the real facts and give false evidence in order to implicate their enemies, the only result is that persons who are probably guilty have to, be acquitted. i allow the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence and direct the appellants to be released.

Full Judgment

Ryves, J.

1. That a riot took place about sunset in the village of Rawatpur on the 22nd of January last in which one Abid Ali unfortunately was fatally injured is established beyond doubt. Ten men were sent up for trial under Sections 147 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code to the Court of Session at Shahjahanpur. The learned Judge has convicted three of them and these have appealed. The learned Judge has come to the definite conclusion that the evidence on both sides is wholly unreliable. He says: 'as the witnesses on both sides are unreliable there remains only the reports on which to base any definite conclusion.' This is not a legitimate use of a First Information Report. Such reports are not subst native evidence of the facts recorded in them and a conviction cannot be based on a report. They can be used to corroborate the witnesses who made them and are of value as showing that they told the same story at the first possible occasion. If they told a different story in Court, the First Report can be used to contradict them or discredit their testimony. But it is not legitimate for a. Court when witnesses tell a different story in the witness-box and contradict the report made by them to discard the evidence given on oath and to rely on the report. The result probably is that there has been a miscarriage of justice in this case, but that is not the fault of the Court but of the complainants themselves and their witnesses. If they choose to suppress the real facts and give false evidence in order to implicate their enemies, the only result is that persons who are probably guilty have to, be acquitted. I allow the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence and direct the appellants to be released.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial