Allahabad HC | Doubtful Recoveries And Ante-Timed FIR Lead To Acquittal In 1982 Dacoity Case

The Allahabad High Court has overturned the conviction of two men in a 44-year-old dacoity case, ruling that 'ante-timed' FIRs and glaring inconsistencies in police recovery procedures fatally undermine the prosecution's narrative. Striking a blow against shoddy investigations, the Bench ruled that the failure to establish the authenticity of looted article lists and the suspicious timing of police records necessitated the extension of the benefit of doubt to the surviving appellants.

A Single Judge bench of Hon'ble Lakshmi Kant Shukla, J. heard the criminal appeal challenging a 1982 judgment of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura. The case, which originally involved seven appellants, saw the appeal survive only for two individuals, Jaswant and Chandrapal, following the death of five other co-appellants during the long pendency of the litigation.

Fundamental Flaws in Prosecution Evidence

The Allahabad High Court scrutinized the testimonies of PW-1, PW-2, and PW-3, who claimed to be eyewitnesses to the dacoity. It noted material contradictions regarding the weapons carried by the accused. While the prosecution alleged a fierce encounter where two dacoits were killed and seven arrested, the Court found it highly improbable that none of the weapons allegedly carried by the accused were produced before the Trial Court to establish recovery from their possession. Furthermore, the Allahabad High Court highlighted a massive disparity in the property involved. While the list of looted articles (Exhibit Ka-2) included 52 gold items, 72 silver items, and substantial cash, the police only claimed to have recovered five gold rings and a small sum of Rs. 300 from the apprehended accused. The Bench remarked that the prosecution failed to explain how such a large quantity of loot disappeared when the suspects were caught nearly at the spot.

Judicial Observations on Ante-Timed FIR

The Allahabad High Court found that the timings recorded by the police did not align with the testimonies of the witnesses. It highlighted that “As per statement of P.W.-2 when he returned village after lodging the FIR, he found Police personnel witnessed after the said encounter, they remained present there and continued to remain there up to 7 to 8 am, which raises a serious question regarding promptness of FIR under Section 307 I.P.C. along with Section 25 Arms Act and also about lodging of appellants in lock-up of police station at the said relevant time. Accordingly, the said FIR reveals to be ante-time which shakes the foundation of prosecution story.”

Background

The dispute originated from an incident on the night of March 4/5, 1978, in District Mathura, where 13 to 14 dacoits allegedly looted three houses while the male villagers were away at a wedding. The prosecution claimed that a police party led by PW-4 intercepted the gang, leading to an encounter where two miscreants were killed and seven were arrested with some looted items.

The appellants were charged under Section 395 and Section 397 of the I.P.C.. The Trial Court in 1982 had convicted the appellants, sentencing them to terms ranging from seven to eight years. During the appeal, the appellants argued that they were falsely implicated due to political rivalry with the village Pradhan (PW-3) and pointed out that they had already been acquitted in a cross-case related to the same encounter under the Arms Act and Section 307 of the I.P.C.. The Allahabad High Court agreed that the lapses in investigation and the suspicious nature of the FIR made the conviction unsustainable.

Case Details:
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 271 of 1982
Case Title: Keshav Deo and others v. State of U.P
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Brijesh Sahai, D.s. Tiwari, Keshav Sahai, Ram Kumar
For the Respondent(s): A.G.A., M.a.siddiqui

Source: 2026 CaseBase(ALL) 1365