IMPORTANT POINT
Common object – No overt act is required to be imputed to a particular person when charge is under Section 149 IPC – Presence of accused as part of unlawful assembly is sufficient for conviction.

JUDGMENT

UJJAL BHUYAN, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.09.2012 passed by the Allahabad High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant alongwith others under Sections 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

2. It may be mentioned that learned Sessions Judge, Etah vide the judgment and order dated 20.01.1997 passed in Sessions Trial No. 17 of 1993 convicted the appellant alongwith three others under Sections 148 and 302/149 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000.00 for the conviction under Section 148 IPC with a default stipulation and further sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302/149 IPC. Another accused Shree Dev was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 147 and 302/149 IPC. He was sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000.00 with a default stipulation for the offence committed under Section 147 IPC and to suffer imprisonment for life under Section 302/149 IPC.

3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, all the five accused persons including the appellant herein preferred criminal appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) before the Allahabad High Court (High Court) which was registered as Criminal Appeal No. 340 of 1997. By the judgment and order dated 27.09.2012, a division bench of the High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence of all the accused persons including that of the appellant and dismissed the criminal appeal.

4. The appellant then preferred petition for special leave to appeal before this Court being SLP(Criminal) No. 750/2013. This Court vide the order dated 04.02.2013 had issued notice on the special leave petition as well as on the application for bail. On 30.06.2014, this Court granted leave but rejected the prayer for bail. It was thereafter that Criminal Appeal No. 1348 of 2014 came to be registered.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. Prosecution case in brief is that informant Sarwan Kumar, son of late Satya Narain, had lodged a written report (First Information Report) i.e. FIR before Police Station Soron, District Etah on 08.09.1992 at 05:10 PM. He stated that on 08.09.1992 at about 04:30 PM, he and his father Satya Narain as well as his uncle Laxmi Narain as per their daily routine, came to Ganga ghat near Ambhagarh Akhada, after easing themselves, for taking bath. At around the same time, from the side of Dhimaro Ka Mohalla, Bhola Shankar and Kuldeep Kumar Tiwari came. He and his uncle proceeded ahead while talking with Bhola Shankar and Kuldeep Kumar Tiwari. This way they had reached the temple of Govardhan Nath Ji. In the meantime, from the southern side of Tulsi Park, Shree Dev and his four sons, viz., Munna Lal, Raju, Nitya Nand and Uchchav @ Pappu, resident of Mohalla Tiraha, Chodah Pore, P.S. Soron, armed with kanta, knives and country-made pistol confronted his father Satya Narain. All the accused persons caught hold of his father and started assaulting him with kanta and knives. On hearing the cries of his father, informant Sarwan Kumar and others dashed towards Satya Narain to save him. It was then that appellant Nitya Nand fired from his country-made pistol whereafter all the accused persons made good their escape from the south-western side. When the informant and others reached the spot, his father Satya Narain had already succumbed to the multiple injuries which he had suffered on his body.

6.1. A written report of the incident scribed by Kuldeep Kumar Tiwari i.e., the FIR was submitted by Sarwan Kumar at 05:10 PM on the same day at P.S. Soron.

6.2. It was mentioned that Shree Dev, deceased Satya Narain, and Laxmi Narain were the three brothers. Laxmi Narain, who was the youngest of the three, had no issue; so he had executed a will in favour of Satya Narain’s sons. Shree Dev and his sons including the appellant Nitya Nand were enraged by