Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
B.K. Narayan, Ghandikota Sri Devi, JJ.
Bachh Lal and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3019 of 1986
Decided On : 24-04-2019
Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 147, 148, 149, 302/201 – Murder – Criminal Assault – Ante mortem injuries – Appeal against conviction – whether the appellants are actually authors of the ante mortem and the post-mortem injuries found on the body of the deceased – Held, None of the so-called eyewitnesses of the incident had seen the occurrence and the possibility of false implication of the accused-appellants – previous enmity between him and accused-appellant – prosecution has failed to prove its case against the surviving appellants beyond all reasonable doubts. Hence the appellants are entitled to benefit of doubt – Appeal allowed. Para 31,32,33
Facts of the Case:
Murder – Criminal Assault – Ante mortem injuries – Appeal against conviction – whether the appellants are actually authors of the ante mortem and the post-mortem injuries found on the body of the deceased.
Finding of Court:
None of the so-called eyewitnesses of the incident had seen the occurrence and the possibility of false implication of the accused-appellants – previous enmity between him and accused-appellant – prosecution has failed to prove its case against the surviving appellants beyond all reasonable doubts. Hence the appellants are entitled to benefit of doubt.
Result: Appeal allowed
JUDGMENT :
1. From the perusal of the order sheet of this appeal, it transpires that Bachchi Lal Singh-A1, Suraja Singh-A5 and Raj Kishore Singh-A6, died during the pendency of this appeal and this appeal qua Bacchi Lal Singh-A1, Suraja Singh-A5 and Raj Kishore Singh-A6 was dismissed as abated on 13.3.2018.
2. The challenge to the impugned judgment and order in this appeal is now only on behalf of the surviving appellants Suraj Pal Singh-A2, Aqbal Singh-A3, Maiya Din-A4, Raj Karan Singh-A7 only.
3. Heard Sri Mukhtar Alam and Sri Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for Suraj Pal Singh-A2, Aqbal Singh-A3 and Maiya Din-A4, Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for Raj Karan Singh-A7, Ms. Manju Thakur, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.
4. This appeal has been preferred by Bachchi Lal Singh-A1, Suraj Pal Singh-A2, Aqbal Singh-A3, Maiya Din-A4, Suraja Singh-A5, Raj Kishore Singh-A6 and Raj Karan Singh-A7 against the judgment and order dated 18.11.1986 passed by Special Additional Sessions Judge, Banda in Sessions Trial No. 32 of 1986, arising out of Case Crime No. 60 of 1985, P.S. Baberu, District-Banda under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302/201 I.P.C. by which all the appellants were convicted and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 148 I.P.C. imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with 149 I.P.C. four years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 read with Section 149 I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
5. The brief facts of this case as alleged by the prosecution are that Kamal Singh son of Adhar Singh, resident of village-Jalalpur, P.S. Baberu, District-Banda, had lodged a written report of the occurrence (Ex. Ka-1) at P.S. Baberu on 19.3.1985 at 7 a.m. and thereby he had informed the Station Officer, Police Station, Baberu that accused Suraj Pal Singh-A2, Maiyadin-A4, Akbal Singh-A3, Raj Kishore Singh-A6, Raj Karan Singh-A7, Suraja Singh-A5 and Bachchi Lal-A1 were known to him from before. Visheshwar Singh had been murdered and in that case Gulab Singh, Raj Bahadur and Shiv Adhar Singh were the accused. Gulab Singh and Raj Bahadur Singh are the brothers of Kamal Singh, informant and Shiv Adhar Singh is his father. Visheshwar, deceased was the father-in-law of Bachchi Lal-A1. The informant and his father had been acquitted in that case. The accused are alleged to have committed the murder of Shiv Adhar Singh, father of informant Kamal Singh out of that animosity.
6. Accused Raj Karan Singh-A7 and Raj Kishore Singh-A6 are the sons of Chandrabhan. All the accused are co-laterals and are members of the same group and party.
7. On the 18th day of March, 1985 at about 5 p.m. the informant's father Shiv Adhar was coming from the Gaura Har. He was followed by the informant Kamal Singh, Indrajit, Chhatrapal, Ram Sharan and Buddhraj. Ram Sharan and Buddhraj were returning after harvesting. No sooner had his father Shiv Adhar Singh was at a distance of six paces from the drain on the road all the accused suddenly came out of the drain. Accused Suraj Pal Singh-A2, Raj Kishore Singh-A6 and Bachchi Lal-A1 were armed with guns, accused Akbal Singh-A3 and Suraja Singh-A5 were armed with pistols. Accused Maiyadin-A4 was armed with a spear (barchhi) and accused Raj Karan Singh-A7 was armed with a gandasa. On the exhortation of accused Raj Karan Singh-A7 and Maiyadin-A4 to kill Shiv Adhar Singh, all the accused fired at his father Shiv Adhar Singh, as a result of which he sustained fire arm injuries on his person and fell on the ground. They had raised an alarm. But the accused had dragged his father Shiv Adhar towards south and had taken him to the field of Dhola Chamar where Raj Karan Singh-A7 had chopped off the head of Shiv Adhar Singh with the gandasa with which he was armed. Thereafter, the accused fled. Since he could not make arrangements at night and, therefore, he could not go to the Police Station, Baberu for lodging a first information report of the occurrence. In the morning, h
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
