The court confirmed that related eyewitnesses can provide reliable testimony in murder cases when corroborated by medical evidence, emphasizing that evidence must be assessed for credibility rather than dismissed due to witness relationships.

JUDGMENT :

Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.

1. Heard Shri Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned Amicus for appellant-Chunni Lal and Raj Kumar Yadav, who have been released from the prison after remission has been granted to them in Criminal Appeal Nos. 351 of 2005 and 532 of 2005, Shri Chandra Shekher Pandey for appellant-Sanjay Yadav in Criminal Appeal No. 402 of 2005 and Shri Bipin Kumar Rai for appellant-Annu Khatik and Shri A.A. Zaidi for appellant-Munna Khatik in Criminal Appeal No. 351 of 2005 and Shri Prabhat Adhaulia, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. All these appeals have been preferred by the convict appellants against the same impugned judgment and order and thus for the sake of convenience all these three appeals are being disposed off by this common judgment.

3. These criminal appeals have been preferred by appellants-Annu Khatik, Munna Khatik and Chunnilal in Criminal Appeal No. 351 of 2005, appellant-Raj Kumar Yadav in Criminal Appeal No. 532 of 2005 appellant-Sanjay Yadav in Criminal Appeal No. 402 of 2005, under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dated 18.2.2005 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Faizabad convicting and sentencing the appellants under Sections 147 IPC for one year rigorous imprisonment each, under Section 452 IPC for three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- each and under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC for life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- each, the appellant No. 3/Chunni Lal in Criminal Appeal No. 351 of 2005 under Section 3(1)(X) SC/ST Act for two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine the rigorous imprisonment for one year year each, acquitting the appellants No. 1 and 2 under Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act and acquitting the appellants under Sections 504 and 506 IPC each in S.T. No. 400/1996, arising out of Case Crime No. 1747/1991, under Sections 147 , 452, 506/149, 504/149, 302/149 IPC and 3(1) (X) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Faizabad.

4. Brief facts necessary for disposal of the instant appeals are in terms that the informant Nirmala lodged a First Information Report at Police Station Kotwali Nagar Faizabad on 25.11.1991 at 22.30 hours by moving a written application alleging therein that she is resident of Mohalla Khurdabad and on 25.11.1991 at about 6.00 p.m. accused persons Raj Kumar Yadav, Chunnilal Kahar, Sanjay, Munna, Annu and others came to her house and called her son Raju and when she replied that he is coming in a while, accused Raj Kumar entered into her house, hurling filthy abuses and assaulted her son and on an alarm raised by her, her son Putti Lal and many others persons of the locality arrived and at that moment accused persons dragged her son outside the house and started assaulting him with lathi and hockey on his head with the intention to kill him and thinking that he is died they all fled away. The head of her son was fractured from many places, he became unconscious. It is also stated in the end that she had admitted her son in a hospital.

5. On the basis of above written information an FIR at case Crime No. 1747 of 1991, under Sections 147 , 452, 323, 308, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (X) of the SC/ST Act was registered and the investigation was entrusted to Sub Inspector Shri Santosh Kumar Yadav.

6. The injured Raju was taken to District Hospital Faizabad and following injuries were found on his person by Dr. K.N. Kaushal:

“(i) Lacerated wound on left side of skull 2 c.m.x 5 c.m. x muscle deep