Advocates:
D.MUKHERJI, D.P.UMYAL, O.P.RANA, U.K.JHA, Udaipratap Singh

Facts

A longstanding enmity existed between two groups in village Nirpura due to disputes over cultivable land between collaterals. (!) [1000166880001] One group included appellants Daryao Singh (46), Birbal (50), Dharam Pal (29), and Om Pal (25), while the other included murdered persons Mukhtara and Raghubir, and injured Asa Ram (PW1), Bija (PW10), Asghar (PW4), and Smt. Jahani (PW3). (!) [1000166880001][1000166880002] Previously, Daryao's father Hargyan (Mukhtara's first cousin) was murdered, leading to convictions and parole of some from the victims' side including PW1, deceased Raghubir, PW10, and PW4.[1000166880001] Daryao and others had filed a pending partition suit, and Daryao allegedly sought forcible possession of PW1's land.[1000166880001] On 7-6-1967 at ~6:30 a.m., Mukhtara, Raghubir, PW1, and PW10 traveled in a buggi driven by PW4 near Daryao's field; PW3 followed with food.[1000166880002] ~18 persons, including appellants armed with balams (sharp-edged) and lathis, waited on the field boundary, surrounded the buggi, attacked occupants shouting to kill them, causing deaths of Mukhtara and Raghubir, and injuries to others. (!) [1000166880002] Mukhtara had multiple head abrasions, swellings, depressed fracture, and deep incised wounds exposing bone/brain. (!) (!) (!) [1000166880003][1000166880004][1000166880005] Raghubir had abrasions, punctured wound, lacerated and round head wounds. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) PW1 (Asa Ram) had punctured wound on chest, multiple abrasions, contusion, incised wound. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000166880006] PW3 (Smt. Jahani) had lacerated wound and contusions from blunt weapon. (!) (!) (!) (!) PW4 (Asghar) had contusion and punctured wound. (!) (!) PW10 (Bija) had contused/lacerated wounds and abrasion. (!) (!) (!) (!) Appellants Om Pal, Daryao, and Birbal had minor lacerations, abrasions, contusions. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000166880007] Trial court convicted 7 (including 4 appellants) under 302/149, 149/324, 149/34 IPC and 147/148 IPC; acquitted 11. (!) High Court acquitted 3 more, upheld 4 appellants' life sentences. (!) [1000166880008] Defence claimed victims' side killed deceased then attacked appellants absurdly; appellants admitted presence at scene via injuries. (!) (!) Daryao spontaneously recalled PW1 etc. killing his father 15 years prior. (!)

Ratio

Prosecution evidence showed >5 assailants waited with weapons near Daryao's field for buggi, surrounded/attacked victims, indicating pre-planning and common object; S.149 IPC applied despite acquittals reducing convicted to 4, as total participants established ≥5 beyond doubt from injuries, circumstances, and admissions. (!) [1000166880008][1000166880009][1000166880010] Acquittal of some (benefit of doubt/identity) does not benefit convicted if firm finding on ≥5 participants; no presumption innocent extends to convicted, nor requires exactly 5 convicted for S.149.[1000166880009][1000166880013] No inflexible rule on numbers; inference from totality of facts/circumstances case-specific; doubt as to some identities does not negate overall unlawful assembly if common object proved. (!) [1000166880009][1000166880013] Facts showed pre-concert sufficient for S.34 IPC alternatively (vicarious liability not number-dependent).[1000166880010] Injuries on both sides, victim accounts (despite non-specific roles/tutoring suspicion), and scene consistent with group attack > victim numbers. (!) (!) For juvenile Om Pal (~15 years at trial, lathi-armed, no specific role/prior), S.29 UP Children Act applicable for approved school commitment, not adult sentence; recommend remission.[1000166880014][1000166880015] (!) (!) Appeal dismissed, convictions/sentences affirmed (subject to Om Pal observation).[1000166880016] (!) (!)