Supreme Court Slams Allahabad HC for Illegally Modifying Murder Conviction.


23 April 2025 Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law   |   Murder Homicide >> Criminal Law  

The Supreme Court of India has strongly criticized a judgment of Ramyash at Lal Bahadur v/s The State of Uttar Pradesh & Others., by the Allahabad High Court for modifying its own previously delivered final order in a criminal appeal. The apex court, in its recent ruling, emphasized that such a modification, beyond the correction of clerical or arithmetical errors, is impermissible under Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).

The case originated from a criminal trial in Jaunpur where Bhupendra Singh, Moti Lal, and Prahlad were convicted for offenses including murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Allahabad High Court, in its initial judgment dated May 21, 2018, dismissed the appeals filed by the accused, thereby upholding the trial court's decision.


 

 

Subsequently, the accused filed a "Correction Application" seeking a clarification of the First Judgment. Surprisingly, the High Court, via its impugned judgment and order dated February 8, 2019, allowed this application and significantly modified its earlier verdict. The conviction under Section 302 IPC was converted to one under Section 304 Part II IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), and the sentences were substantially reduced. Bhupendra Singh's life sentence was reduced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment, while Moti Lal and Prahlad's sentences were reduced to 5 years of rigorous imprisonment.

This modification prompted two sets of appeals before the Supreme Court. The first set was filed by the original complainant, Ramyash Lal Bahadur, challenging the High Court's modification. The second appeal was filed by accused Bhupendra Singh seeking complete acquittal.

The Supreme Court bench, after hearing the arguments, unequivocally stated that the High Court's action was "totally contrary to the provisions of Section 362 of the Cr.P.C." The court cited Section 362, which explicitly bars a court from altering or reviewing its judgment once it has been signed, except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors.

The Supreme Court scrutinized both the initial and the modified judgments of the High Court. It noted that the First Judgment thoroughly examined the evidence, including the injuries sustained by the deceased and other witnesses, the post-mortem report, and the testimonies of eyewitnesses, ultimately concluding that the prosecution had successfully proven its case beyond reasonable doubt, justifying the conviction under Section 302 IPC.

In contrast, the impugned judgment, while purporting to correct a "clerical error," fundamentally altered the findings, concluding that the incident appeared to be a result of sudden provocation, thus warranting the conversion of the conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC.

Referring to its previous rulings, including Smt. Sooraj Devi v. Pyare Lal and Another and Naresh and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court reiterated that the inherent power of the court cannot be used to override the specific prohibitions within the Cr.P.C., such as Section 362. The court expressed its "great concern" that the High Court had committed such a "grievous error."

Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by the complainant and dismissed the appeal filed by Bhupendra Singh. The impugned judgment and order of the Allahabad High Court dated February 8, 2019, was quashed and set aside. The Supreme Court directed the accused, if they had not already served the sentence as per the High Court's initial judgment, to surrender before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur, within four weeks to serve the remainder of their original life sentences.

However, the Supreme Court also reserved the right of the accused persons to challenge the First Judgment dated May 21, 2018, in a separate appeal, which, if filed, would be considered on its own merits.

This judgment underscores the sanctity of final orders passed by courts and the limited scope for their alteration under the Cr.P.C., emphasizing that a change in the reasoning and the conviction itself goes far beyond the rectification of mere clerical errors.


Section 302., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Section 304., Indian Penal Code - 1860

Indian Penal Code, 1860