The trial court's acquittal based on technicalities disregarded substantial eyewitness and medical evidence, necessitating a retrial.

1. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 10-8-2006 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur whereby and whereunder learned trial Court has acquitted respondents No. 1 to 6 of the charges framed against them under S.147, S.148, S.452/149, 302/149, 323/149 (for 4 counts) of the Indian Penal Code by affording benefit of doubt, the applicant, father of deceased Ramu @ Ramkumar has filed the instant criminal revision under S.401 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The revision is filed on the ground that the order of acquittal in favour of respondents is very lenient, insufficient, against law and facts. The prosecution has proved the case against the respondents beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution witnesses are trustworthy. Common object of the culprits have been proved and the circumstances of the case are speaking the truth. Ocular evidence is trustworthy, reliable and finds corroboration from the medical evidence and prompt FIR and therefore, the finding of acquittal of the respondents could not safely be recorded by learned trial Court. The respondents who are close relatives entered into the house of the deceased in the right armed with sharp edged and other deadly weapons, inflicted multiple injuries causing multiple fracture on the vital parts of the body of the deceased and fled from the spot together which goes to demonstrate their common object. There were prior inimical terms, they were searching opportunity for revenge. Hence the trial Court should have convicted them with the aid of S.149 of the IPC , Eye - witnesses are trustworthy, natural and trial court ought to have believed the version of injured eye - witnesses. The trial Court has erred in holding that there are contradictions in the statements of witnesses. The trial Court ought to have held that contradiction is minor in nature. A young man has been brutally murdered. The trial Court ought to have awarded capital punishment to the accused. The prosecution has duly proved that 11 accused persons assembled unlawfully armed with deadly weapon. Hence the revision may be allowed and the respondents be awarded capital punishment for the charges leveled against them.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 26-11-2004 at about 8 pm near Jatia Talab, Jarhabhata, PS Civil Lines, Bilaspur, all the 11 accused persons had formed an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon axe, hockey stick, steel plate and other arms on account of earlier dispute and entered into the house of Ramu @ Ramkumar, dragged him out, assaulted him by axe and other weapons. They also caused injuries to P.W. 5 Ku. Naina, P.W. 6 Dev Kumari, P.W. 7 Badri Prasad and Vinay Kumar. Injured Ramu @ Ramkumar was taken to CIMS, Bilaspur and thereafter while shifting to a nursing home, Ramu @ Ramkumar succumbed to his injuries. P.W. 5 Ku. Naina, sister of injured Ramu alias Ramkumar lodged FIR (Ex. P - 8) before Civil Lines police which in turn registered the Crime No. 1038/04 under S.307, S.147, S.148, S.149 and S.323 of IPC at about 8.00 pm against all the 11 accused persons. After death of Ramu @ Ramkumar at about 10.30 pm on 26-11-2004, P.W. 6 Devkumari intimated about death to the police. Police recorded merg vide Ex. P - 9 on 27-11-2004 at 2.00 am. During investigation PW. 5 Ku. Naina, P.W. 6 Devkumari, P.W. 7 Badri Prasad and Vinay were sent for medical examination. P.W. 3 Dr. B.K. Vaishnav examined above injured persons and noticed following injuries:

(i) Injured Ku. Naina (P.W. 5) - Ex. P - 4
Lacerated would over occipital region 1 x1/2x1/2 cm, pain in body.
(ii) Badri Prasad (P.W.) 7) Ex. P - 5
Abrasion over left scapular