The main legal point established in the judgment is the reformatory approach of the criminal justice system and the application of the doctrine of proportionality in imposing punishment.

JUDGMENT :

KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, J.

1. Heard Heard Sri Siya Ram Pandey, learned counsel for appellants and Sri Vikas Goswami, learned counsel for State.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellants against the judgment and order dated 4.5.2017, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Hapur in Sessions Trial No. 71 of 2016 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Shailesh and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 328 of 2015 convicting the accused-appellants under Sections 302 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in brevity ‘IPC’) Police Station Gardhmukteshwar, District Hapur and sentenced the accused-appellants to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine, further to undergo imprisonment for a period of one month.

3. The facts of the present case are that on 31.7.2015, while the informant and his father Babu Ram (deceased) were returning home after closing their tea shop, they were intercepted by accused-appellant-Raju, who asked them to pay Rs. 150/- for the grocery items which were purchased by the deceased earlier. The accused-appellant Raju was told that the amount will be paid the next day, hearing which he got annoyed and abused the complainant-Sanjay, son of the deceased and his father (deceased). At this stage, while the complainant-Sanjay and the deceased were proceeding on their way, the accused- appellants surrounded them. The accused-appellants then started beating and kicking the deceased, till he breath his last. After killing the deceased, the accused-appellants fled away. Pursuant to this an FIR, Case Crime No. 202 of 2015 was registered by the complainant-Sanjay against the accused-appellants, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. Consequently, the accused-appellants were arrested.

4. On trial, the trial court vide order dated 4.5.2015 found the accused-appellants guilty under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced them to imprisonment of life and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each.

5. After investigation, the charge-sheet u/s 302 I.P.C. against the accused persons Shailesh, Mahadev, Kuldeep and Raju was filed. The cognizance was taken on the charge-sheet by the concerned Magistrate and the case was committed to the court of session under section 302/34 I.P.C. The charge against the accused; Shailesh, Mahadev, Kuldeep and Raju was ordered to framed, to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and wanted to be tried. The prosecution was directed to produce the complete evidence in support of their statement.

6. On being summoned, the accused-appellants pleaded not guilty and wanted to be tried, hence, the trial started and the prosecution examined about 9 witnesses who are as follows:

7. In support of ocular version following documents were filed and proved:

8. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that no offence as alleged has been committed by the accused. It is further submitted that the accused had no motive to do away with the deceased and that