Conviction cannot stand when significant doubts arise due to contradictory testimonies and acquittal of co-accused on similar evidence, emphasizing the principle of parity in criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Prashant Mishra-I, J.

1. Heard Mr. Sikandar B Kochar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Amit Sinha, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the materials on record.

2. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred by appellant, namely, Khunni Lal, against the judgment and order dated 17.05.1989 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kannauj, Farrukhabad in Sessions Trial No. 219 of 1987, arising out of Case Crime No. 56 of 1987, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Thathiya Sub-District Kannauj, District Farrukhabad, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life, under Section 302 I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, in brief, the accused persons, namely, Khunni Lal, Bhagwan Din and Jagdish belong to the family of complainant Ram Singh and they are co-sharers of half of the house and land of the complainant. Accused Khunni Lal is a Lekhpal and Bhagwan Din is an inspector in the canal department in district Kanpur. The accused persons built their house by encroaching the land of the complainant. On 09.05.1987, at around 6 PM, when the accused persons were cutting the eastern platform (chabutra) of the complainant, his father objected, then the accused persons started abusing. At the same time, the complainant’s younger brother Mauji Lal also reached there. He also objected and brought his father to his doorstep and the villagers pacified them. After an hour, at around 7 pm, accused Khunni Lal armed with a big knife, Bhagwan Din armed with a pistol and Jagdish armed with a spear arrived there. At that time, informant’s brother, Mauji Lal, was smoking outside the shed. Complainant ran and grabbed Jagdish's spear. At that very moment, Bhagwan Din and Jagdish grabbed both the hands of Mauji Lal, and Khunni Lal stabbed Mauji Lal in the left side of his neck. Mauji lal died on the spot. Complainant, his brother Bechelal, his father Keshari Lal, Mauji Lal's wife, Chhammi Lal, and other villagers witnessed the said incident. The accused persons fled away with knife and pistol extending fire shots. Report of the said incident got lodged on the next day.

4. The police conducted panchayatnama of the body of the deceased and seized a broken spade and blood-soaked soil from the place of occurrence. After the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against the aforesaid accused persons.

5. The accused persons, namely, Khunni Lal, Bhagwan Din and Jagdish were charged with commission of offence under Section 302/34 I.P.C. They denied the charges and sought trial.

6. To prove the prosecution case, the prosecution examined PW-1 Ram Singh, PW-2 Chhammi Lal, PW-3 Bhagwati, PW-4 Head Constable Dinesh Pal Singh, PW-5 Dr. V.K. Bhatiya, PW-6 Rajendra Singh Solanki (S.I., investigating officer).

7. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein they claimed their innocence and said that they have been falsely implicated in this case. The accused persons furnished two defence witnesses in defence.

8. In documentary evidence, written report (exhibit-Ka.1), F.I.R. (exhibit- Ka.2), chick copy (exhibit-Ka.3), postmortem report (exhibit-Ka.4), site plan (exhibit-Ka.5), site plan (exhibit-Ka.6), panchayatnama (exhibit-Ka.7), arakshi receipt (exhibit-Ka.8) photo nash (exhibit-Ka.9), police station report (exhibit-Ka.10), police station report (exhibit-Ka.11), letter to CMO (exhibit-Ka.12), recovery memo of plain soil (exhibit-Ka.13), recovery memo of blood stained soil (exh