The prosecution must prove the charges against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and unreliable witnesses, lack of a source of light, doubts about the place of occurrence, and lapses in the investigation can weaken the prosecution's case.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

1. These criminal appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 17.11.2016, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Muzaffar Nagar in S.T. No.483 of 2013 (State vs. Kareem and others), under Sections 452, 302/34, 506 IPC, P.S. Mansoorpur, District-Muzaffar Nagar, convicting accused (Kareem, Shahjad, Wajid) for offences under Sections 452, 302/34, 506 IPC and sentencing each of them with imprisonment for 3 years and fine of Rs.5000/- under Section 452 IPC, in default of fine, 3 months further imprisonment, life imprisonment to each of them along with fine of Rs.10,000 under Section 302/34 IPC, in default of fine, 6 months further imprisonment and 2 years imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5000/- to each of them under Section 506 IPC, in default of fine, 3 months further imprisonment. Accused Kareem has been acquitted from the charges under Section 25/27 of the Arms Act, giving benefit of doubt.

2. Being aggrieved therefrom, accused Shahjad preferred Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2017, accused Kareem preferred Criminal Appeal No.29 of 2017 accused Wajid preferred Criminal Appeal No.30 of 2017 for setting aside their conviction and passing an order of acquittal.

3. Since common issues are involved in all the three appeals, hence all the three appeals are being disposed of by a common order. The fact stated in Criminal Appeal No.29 of 2017 shall be treated as a leading appeal.

4. In brief, prosecution case is that on 29.7.2012 at 5 AM in the morning when first informant Deepak along with his mother Kauhal Devi were present in house of his brother Rahul, neighbour Kareem, Shahjad, Fayyaz and Wajid entered the house, Kareem and Shahjad were armed with country-made pistols. Fayyaz and Wajid told that give him a lesson for bothering Anjum, daughter of Kareem and kill the Rahul. On the said exhortation, Kareem and Shahjad fired shots with intention to murder Rahul, Rahul fell down on spot due to injury caused to him. On account of noise raised by him and his mother and on seeing the villagers arriving, accused ran away, giving warning that they will kill them also. They carried injured Rahul to District Hospital where doctor declared him dead.

5. On the basis of written report (Ext. Ka-1), Case Crime No. 365/2012, under Sections 452, 302, 506 IPC was lodged against accused. Chik FIR (Ext. Ka-9) was registered and its entry was recorded in G.D. (Ext. Ka-10). The investigation of the case was handed over to Ramesh Chandra Yadav, S.O. Mansoorpur, Sub-Inspector Pritam Singh Rawal prepared inquest memo (Ext. ka-2) of deceased Rahul and relevant documents, like, letter to R.I. (Ext. Ka-3), letter to C.M.O. (Ext. Ka-4), photo lash (Ext. Ka-5), dead body challan (Ext. Ka-6) and sent the dead body for post-mortem.

6. Investigating Officer prepared spot map (Ext. Ka-18) and recorded statement of witnesses, recovered pellets from the place of incident and prepared its memo (Ext. Ka-16) and recovered cartridges and prepared its memo (Ext. ka-17). During investigation, weapon of the crime, country-made pistol and two live cartridges were recovered from the possession of Kareem vide recovery memo (Ext. Ka-7). FIR was lodged against Kareem under Section 25/27 of the Arms Act in Case Crime No.469/2012. Charge-sheet under Sections 452, 302/34, 506 IPC was submitted against accused Kareem, Shahjad and Wajid and charge-sheet under Section 25 of the Arms Act was submitted against Kareem by Investigating officer which are Ext. Ka-19 & Ext. Ka-14 respectively. Charges were framed against accused Kareem, Shahjad and Wajid under Sections 452, 302/34, 506 IPC and under Section 25 of the Arms Act against the accused Kareem which they denied and claimed trial.

7. In joint trial of the two cases, prosecution produced as many as 8 witnesses viz. P.W.-1 Deepak, 1st informant and brother of deceased (eye-witness), P.W. 2 Smt. Kaushal, mother of deceased (eye-witness), P.W.3, Sub-Inspector Pr