Karnesh Kumar Singh vs State Of U. P.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1968 Supreme(SC) 117

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. RAMASWAMI, J.M. SHELAT AND V. BHARGAVA, JJ.
Karnesh Kumar Singh and others, Appellants
Versus
State of U.P., Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 213 of 1967,
D/- 15-4-1968.
Advocates appeared
M/s. R. K Garg, S. C. Agarwala and D. P. Singh. Advocates of M/s. Ramamurthi and Co., Advocates and Mr. A. K. Gupta Advocate, for Appellants, Mr. O. P. Rana, Advocate, for Respondent.

Advocates:
A.K.Gupta, D.P.Singh, O.P.RANA, R.K.GARG, RAMAMURTHI, S.C.AGRAWAL

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1980 - Sections 302 and 201 r/w149 - Criminal Trial - Offence of Murder - Appeal against conviction - Three of them were armed with fire-arms and that they all fired at Lal Singh simultaneously, that appellant Chhetrapal had shot at Harihar also and finally, that appellant Kaushal had given a hatchet blow to Harihar - Held, Possibility of any one or two of them having fired three shots in quick succession cannot, therefore, be ruled out - In that case distinction made on basis that all three of them had fired at Lal Singh cannot be sustained - Therefore, reason given by Trial Judge for imposing extreme penalty on these four appellants as against rest becomes difficult to sustain. It is true that these four appellants were armed with fire-arms and a hatchet - But others also were armed with equally dangerous weapons, such as spears and bankas - Possibility of any one or two of them having fired the three shots in quick succession cannot, therefore, be ruled out - In that case distinction made on basis that all three of them had fired at Lal Singh cannot be sustained - Therefore, reason given by Trial Judge for imposing extreme penalty on these four appellants as against rest becomes difficult to sustain - It is true that these four appellants were armed with fire-arms and a hatchet - But others also were armed with equally dangerous weapons, such as spears and bankas - Appeal dismissed

Judgement

SHELAT, J. : This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad which confirmed the convictions and sentences passed by the Sessions Judge, Hardoi, in respect of the murders of Lal Singh and his father Harihar. The ten appellants on being convicted under Ss. 302 and 201 read with S. 149 of the Penal Code were awarded various sentences. Four of them, namely, Karnesh Kumar, Krishna Kumar, Kaushal Kumar and Chhetrapal were awarded death sentence and the rest imprisonment for life.

2. At the material time, the two deceased, along with the members of their family, and the appellants lived in village Nir in District Hardoi, and, except for appellants Jugal Kishore and his brother Kailash Narain, they are close relations, their common ancestor being one Jhabba Singh. The evidence, however, shows a long-standing enmity between the members of the branch of Sobaran Singh, one of the sons of Jhabba Singh, on the one hand and the rest of the descendants of Jhabba Singh on the other. It also shows that since 1950, there has been intermittently civil and criminal litigation between the parties, the last of such litigation before the incident in question being in respect of an incident which took place on April 3, 1966 when appellant Ram Kumar charged the deceased Harihar and Lal Singh, and witnesses Jitendra and Virendra and two others with rioting and witness Virendra, in turn, filed a cross complaint against the appellants and some others.

3. According to the prosecution, at about 1 p. m. on June 5, I966, Lal Singh was irrigating his field with canal water when appellants Karnesh and Avdesh diverted the water into their field. There was an exchange of abuses between them in the course of which appellant Karnesh was said to have threatened that he would not rest until Lal Singh was done to death. At about 5.30 that evening Jitendra, Virendra and Girendra, P. Ws. 1, 6 and 8 were in the main room of the Chaupal where Lal Singh lived and Lal Singh was in a room nearby. Fifty paces away from this house is the house where the deceased Harihar lived. Suddenly, a shout was heard to the effect that Lal Singh should be dragged out. On hearing the shout, these witnesses and Lal Singh came out. The witnesses saw appellants Krishna and Chhetrapal armed with guns, appellant Karnesh with a pistol, Ram Kumar and Jugal Kishore with spears, appellants Kaushal and Mahendra with bankas and the rest with lathis. As soon as Lal Singh came out, appellants Krishna, Chhetrapal and Karnesh simultaneously fired at him whereupon Lal Singh fell on the ground. On being threatened that the witnesses would also be shot, they ran away and stood at some distance. Five of these appellants, namely, Chhetrapal Kaushal, Mahendra, Kailash and Jugal Kishore then ran to Harihar s house where appellant Jugal Kishore struck Harihar with a spear in his face and then appellants Kaushal and Jugal Kishore dragged him to where Lal Singh had fallen. Chhetrapal then fired at Harihar with his gun; Jugal Kishore gave another blow with his spear in the chest and the rest beat him with bankas and lathis. Harihar also died on the spot. Appellants Kailash, Jugal Kishore, Kaushal and Mahendra followed by Chhetrapal with his gun, lifted Harihar s body to the field of one Sita Ram where they set fire to it. The other five appellants took Lal Singh s body to the Rathis of P. W. 4, Abdul Bari, and burnt it there on a heap of cowdung cakes. Having thus tried to do away with the dead bodies, appellants Kaushal and Mahendra scraped the blood-stained earth where Lal Singh had fallen as also the drops of blood which had fallen on the way.

4. P. W. l, Jitendra, started on cycle to the Kotwali six miles away and lodged the F. I. R. at about 6.45 p. m. Inspector Jaswant Singh, P. W. 17, started for the scene of offence reaching there at about 7.45 p. m. The fires were put out but Lal Singh s body had practically been burnt out with the result that the Inspe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document