Back
2020 Supreme(All) 723
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, D. VERMA, JJ.
Ram Naresh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2003 of 1996
Decided On : 12-05-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : S.K. Srivastava
For the Respondents:Govt. Advocate
Point of Law: Common intention denotes action in consort and a prior meeting of minds. The acts may be different and may vary in their character but they are all actuated by the same common intention.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 34 and 307 –Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 313 – Prosecution, Intention, Conviction – Offence of Murder – Appeal against conviction - Statements of the eye-witnesses recorded in the case are concerned, they are almost identical and there are no major contradictions between them. The medical evidence fully corroborates the prosecution story. According to both eye-witnesses (P.W. 1 and P.W. 2) accused persons fired with intention to kill them.
Facts of the case: Learned counsel for the appellants submit that presence of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 at the alleged spot were doubtful – While registering the FIR the name of P.W. 1 does not find place – FIR is anti-dated and delayed – All the alleged eye-witnesses P.W. 1 Mauji Ram, P.W. 2 Virendra are interested in inimical witnesses – Informant Mauji Ram is brother of deceased, (P.W. 2) is cousin of deceased –That spot of the alleged incident could not be established – Place of occurrence is not proved
Finding of the court: Court is of the view that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, does not call for any interference by this Court – Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed –Court is of the confirmed view that the materials placed by the prosecution clearly prove the guilt of the three convicts/accused, who were armed with gun and arm with common intention to fire gun shots resulting in death of Mauji Ram as well as causing injuries to Virendra (P.W. 2) –In such circumstances, their conviction and sentence awarded by trial court is hereby confirmed and as Court do not find any merit in this appeal and Court hereby dismissed it
Result: Appeal dismissed
ORDER :
D. Verma, J.
1. This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment conviction order dated 30.10.1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in Sessions Trial No. 130 of 1993 in the State Vs. Ram Naresh and two others convicting the appellants under Sections 302 and 307 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. to rigorous imprisonment for life and five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 I.P.C. further sentenced, this sentence of all the accused persons are meant to run concurrently.
2. Heard Sri R.K. Rathour and Sri Amit Daga, learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the appellant Nos.1 and 2 respectively, Sri Krishna Pahal, learned Additional Advocate General and Sri L.D. Rajbhar, learned AGA for the State-respondents.
3. Ram Laratey, applicant No. 3 had died and a report regarding death had been accepted by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2019.
4. Brief facts giving rise is that on 16.08.1992 informant Jauhari Lal, his elder brother-Mauji Ram and cousin brother-Virendra all of resident of Village Makheda, Police Station Nayagaon, District Etah were coming back on motorcycle to their village from Kaimganj, District Farrukhabad. Virendra was driving the motorcycle while Mauji Ram (deceased) and Jauhari Lal (informant) were sat as a pillion. When they reached Acchera Road, Village Jhabboopur near flour mill (Atta Chakki) of Shiraj Ahmad, rear wheel of the motorcycle got punctured. The informant and Mauji Ram got down there. Virendra took a wrench from the cycle repair shop and unbolted rear wheel of the motorcycle. Informant-Jauhari Lal and deceased-Mauji Ram remained there. Virendra took wheel and went for repair them, Jauhari Lal and his elder brother Mauji Ram (deceased) remained there near the flour mill (Atta chakki) waiting the return of Virendra and watched motorcycle. Virendra returned with repaired wheel and after fitting rear wheel in the motorcycle Virendra started motorcycle and moved to take informant and deceased. He stopped the motorcycle in front of flour mill (Atta chakki) for lifting Mauji Ram (deceased) and informant-Jauhari Lal. Motorcycle was started, Mauji Ram sat behind Virendra when informant-Jauhari Lal wanted to sit behind Mauji Ram all of sudden accused-Ram Naresh, accused-Mahendra and Ram Laratey armed with country made pistols appeared/emerged out from western side, who were hidden behind a hut, and they shouted. Ram Naresh immediately made a fire which hit right side chest of Mauji Ram. On motorcycle informant-Jauhari Lal immediately caught Mauji Ram, jumped and sat behind the Mauji Ram. Virendra moved motorcycle fastly ahead then accused-Ram Laratey and Mahendra each also made a fire but these fires did not hit. The incident of fires took place at about 03:00 p.m. When motorcycle reached near the culvert of Bamba, Mauji Ram succumbed to death due to injury received. They stopped the motorcycle there and put the dead body right side under the tree. Many persons assembled at the place of vicinity. Further it has alleged that attack was made on account of old enmity with accused Ram Naresh. Mauji Ram had given evidence against Ram Naresh in a case and in retaliation Ram Naresh had lodged a case against Mauji Ram under Section 307 I.P.C. in Police Station Kaimganj. Virendra wrote the contents of first information report as informant-Jauhari Lal narrated and on written papers Jauhari Lal had put his thumb impression. Informant-Jauhari Lal came to the Police Station Kaimganj leaving behind dead body on the spot in the supervision of Virendra and other persons collected there.
5. On the basis of written report (Exhibit Ka-1), Head Constable Chhote Lal Tewari (P.W. 6) prepared a chik F.I.R. (Exhibit Ka-5) on 16.08.1992 at 04:30 p.m. and made entry in the GD. at report No. 26 registered as Case Crime No. 336 of 1992 under Sections 302, 307 I.P.C. against all the accused persons.
6. Harpal Singh, Investigating Officer (P.W. 7) started investigation of the case and after completin
