LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/gupteswar-behera-vs-state-of-odisha-and-another-20181214/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Gupteswar Behera vs State of Odisha and Another

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
14 December 2018
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 1586 of 2018
Result
Allowed
Bench
Uday Umesh Lalit, R. Subhash Reddy
Citation
[2018] 14 S.C.R. 1209 : 2018 INSC 1211
Supreme Court Reports [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1209 : 2018 INSC 1211
Headnote

Penal Code, 1860: ss. 148, 149 and 302 – Prosecution case that victim attacked by five persons with sticks, axe and knife – PW 1, brother of the victim and investigating officer reached the place of occurrence – Victim, named the assailants in his dying declarations made separately to PW 1 and the investigating officer – On basis of the evidence of PW 1 and the investigating officer, eye witnesses and witnesses who were present when the dying declaration was made by the deceased to PW1, conviction and sentence of the accused u/ss. 148 and 149 r/w s. 302 – Upheld by the High Court – On appeal, held: On consideration of the number of injuries suffered and their location and extent, the assertions made by both the medical professionals, that the deceased may not have survived for more than ten minutes after receiving the injuries is accepted – There is no contrary evidence in that behalf – Furthermore, PW 1 received the intimation that his brother was lying in a pool of blood whereafter he rushed to the place of occurrence, admittedly at a distance of 15 minutes by walk – This means the time was taken twice over – Person who had not seen the assault but informed PW1, had to cover the distance first and thereafter PW1 reached the place of occurrence – Investigating Officer, arrived at the scene of occurrence even later – Thus, it is doubtful whether the deceased had survived long enough for PW 1 and investigating officer to arrive at the scene of occurrence and then make separate statements to these witnesses – Thus, the appellant entitled to the benefit of doubt and is acquitted of all the charges leveled against him.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by UDAY UMESH LALIT, J. 1. This appeal by special leave challenges the judgment and order dated 29.08.2017 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Criminal Appeal No.50 of 1999. 2. In the present case, crime was registered at 9.00 pm on 15.11.1995 vide FIR No.93 with Rayagada P.S. pursuant to reporting by Pradeep Kumar Patra, later examined as PW1. It was submitted that one Kumurika Nabina informed said PW1 Pradeep that his brother Raghumani was attacked and was lying by the side of a road. Said PW1 Pradeep immediately rushed to the place and
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →