The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of eyewitness testimony, the burden on the accused to explain facts within their exclusive knowledge, and the limited significance of minor contradictions in witness testimony.

Anil Kumar Srivastava-II, J. –

Sri Maneesh Kumar Singh and Farooq Ayoob, learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs. Madhulika Yadav, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State were heard at length.

2. All the three criminal appeals i.e. [Criminal Appeal No. 97 of 2011-Kalp Narain v. State of U.P.], [Criminal Appeal No. 292 of 2011-Shivkaran Shukla v. State of U.P.] and [Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 2011-Kalp Narain v. State of U.P.] arise out of the same judgment, therefore, the same are being disposed of together.

3. Criminal Appeal No. 292 of 2011 has been preferred by appellant Shivkaran Shukla, Criminal Appeal No. 97 of 2011 has been preferred by appellant Kalp Narain Sharma challenging their conviction under Section 302 IPC while Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 2011 has been preferred by the appellant Kalp Narain Sharma challenging his conviction under Arms Act.

4. Under challenge in these criminal appeals is the judgment and order dated 24.12.2010 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Court No. 4, Barabanki in Session Trial No. 456 of 2005 arising out of Case Crime No. 104 of 2005 and Session Trial No. 458 of 2005 arising out of Case Crime No. 119 of 2005, Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki whereby the appellants Shivkaran Shukla and Kalp Narain Sharma have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and were sentenced with imprisonment for life and also with fine of Rs. 20,000/- each, with default stipulation of one year's additional rigorous imprisonment.

5. Appellant Kalp Narain Sharma was further convicted for the offence under Section 25 of Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years' and also with fine of Rs. 5000/-, with default stipulation of three months' rigorous imprisonment.

6. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

7. In brief, the case of the prosecution was that the complainant Ram Abhilakh who happens to be the father of the deceased Raj Kumar lodged an FIR at Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki on 05.03.2005 at 20: 45 hours alleging therein that on that day at about 7.30 p.m. he, his son Ram Kumar, Raj Kumar and Krishna Kumar along with one Mansha Ram, Sunil Kumar and Raj Kumar son of Nanhkau were sitting at their shop at Bhanupur crossing and were talking together. At that time, in the nearby liquor shop, Pawan Kumar Dubey, Shivkaran, resident of village Jarauli, Police Station Asandra, District Barabanki and Kalp Narain Sharma resident of Dhanauli, Police Station Asandra along with one unknown person came and purchased liquor from salesman Shiv Kumar Yadav. When salesman demanded the price of the said liquor then these persons started abusing him and threatened him with dire consequences. Son of the complainant Raj Kumar and other persons seeing such behaviour of the accused persons went there and intervened as to why they are behaving in such a manner. Feeling annoyed by this intervention, Pawan Kumar Dubey and Shivkaran with their countrymade pistols fired on Raj Kumar, Kalp Narain Sharma and the second unknown person forcibly took his son injured Raj Kumar on his motorcycle Suzuki Max 100 bearing Registration No. U.P. 41-C-6001 and Pawan Kumar Dubey and Shivkaran ran away from there on their motorcycle Hero Honda C.D. Dawn bearing Registration No. U.P. 41-E-4696 firing in the air and extending threats of dire consequences. This highhanded behaviour of these culprits continued for about 20 minutes and because of the firing the shopkeepers closed the shutters of their shops and the persons present in the market anyhow managed to run away towards their houses and an atmosphere of terror was created in the market and law and order situation disturbed badly. Thereafter the complainant side, after gathering courage, started search of Raj Kumar. When these persons reached the canal culvert then the body of his son Raj Kumar was found in the canal. Leaving the dead body there the complainant got the