SC: Delay in forwarding FIR to Magistrate not fatal where evidence credible—conviction for political murder affirmed
Case Name: Ombir Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 982 of 2011
Date of Judgment: 26 May 2020
Bench: Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna
Held: The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Ombir Singh under Sections 302/34 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act for the 1999 daylight murder of local politician Abhaiveer Singh Bhadoria @ Munna. The Court ruled that delay in compliance with Section 157 CrPC—the forwarding of the FIR to the Magistrate after 11 days—did not vitiate the trial in the absence of prejudice or mala fide. It emphasized that while such delay raises suspicion, conviction may still rest on credible, corroborated eyewitness evidence. The testimonies of Dinesh Singh (PW-1) and Mukesh Singh (PW-2), the deceased’s brother and companion, were found trustworthy and supported by physical and forensic evidence.
Summary: The case concerned a politically motivated shooting on 15 July 1999 near the residence of one Shivraj Singh Sengar in Etawah. According to the prosecution, Ombir Singh, along with his brother Shiv Veer Singh and others, ambushed and shot the deceased multiple times after shouting threats over ongoing litigation. The defense claimed false implication due to rivalry and argued that the FIR was ante-timed. The Court noted that the post-mortem conducted at 3:00 p.m. the same day confirmed five gunshot injuries, and the inquest and panchayatnama corroborated the sequence of events. Despite an 11-day delay in sending the FIR to the Magistrate, the Court applied the principles from Jafel Biswas v. State of West Bengal and Pala Singh v. State of Punjab, holding that such delay is not fatal unless prejudice is shown.
The Bench also dismissed doubts regarding the field unit’s documentation, explaining that minor lapses in photographic or clerical details could not outweigh direct eyewitness accounts supported by human-blood traces on their clothes. It distinguished the acquittal of co-accused Pramod Singh, noting that he allegedly used a country-made pistol and no pellets were recovered, whereas the appellant’s rifle use was medically corroborated.
Decision: Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence of life imprisonment with fine under Sections 302/34 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act affirmed. The Court found the prosecution version consistent and the ocular evidence credible, ruling that the trial and conviction suffered no legal infirmity.