1

Court No. – 43

Case - GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 371 of 2021

Appellant :- State of U.P.

Respondent :- Billu Singh

Counsel for Appellant :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla J.

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi J.

(Per Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi J.)

1.

Heard Sri Ratan Singh, learned AGA appearing for the State-

applicant on the application seeking leave to file appeal against the

judgment and order dated 21.12.2020 passed by the District and Sessions

Judge, Chitrakoot in Sessions Trial No. 104 of 2016 (State vs. Billu Singh)

arising out of Case Crime No. 22 of 2016, under Section 307 IPC, Police

Station-Bargarh, District Chitrakoot whereby he has acquitted the accused -

respondent.

2.

Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the informant Ravi Dutta

Kesarwani gave a written information on 23.04.2016 stating that his brother

Suryanshu and Chhotu Vishwarkarma had gone to watch orchestra

performance in the wedding of the daughter of Mahesh Singh in Village -

Ovari. Billu Singh, the accused - respondent fired there with a 12 bore

country made pistol. Pellets from the shot hit Suryanshu and Chhotu in their

hands and legs. When both of them shouted, the persons of the Barat ran

towards the spot and Billu Singh ran away from there. The respondent -

Billu Singh was arrested on 24.07.2016 and an unlicensed 12 bore country

made pistol is said to have been recovered from him. The accused-

respondent Billu Singh was charged for committing offence punishable

under Section 307 IPC and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act.

3.

The informant (P.W.11) supported the FIR version and stated that

intimation of the incident was given to him by his brother Suryanshu on

telephone. In his cross-examination, he stated that he was not present on the

2

spot at the time of the incident. Mahesh Singh is not related to them and

they had not been invited to the function. He did not see any one firing the

shot. He had lodged the report as per the information given by his brother,

Sandeep Vishwaarma, Ajeet Singh and Amit Kesarwani.

4.

P.W.-2 - Suryanshu Kesarwani, who got injured in the incident,

supported the prosecution case in his examination-in-chief. In his cross-

examination, he has stated that he had gone uninvited to see orchestra

performance. He was watching the performance facing the west. The

accused was sitting towards his north. The shot was fired from his right.

Billu Singh was caught on the spot and was beaten by several persons.

PW-2 did not get unconscious upon being hit by the pellets but he had laid

down on the earth. Chhotu Vishwakarma also did not get unconscious.

While at one place he stated that Mahesh Singh had told the name of Billu

Singh, at another place he stated that when the people were running away

after the shot was fired, the villagers had told the name of Billu Singh.

5.

P.W.-3 - Chhotu alias Arvind Vishwakarma also supported the

prosecution case in his examination-in-chief. However, in his cross

examination he denied having given any statement to the Investigating

Officer and he denied his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He

categorically stated that Billu Singh did not fire and he does not know the

name and address of the person who had fired the shot. The name of Billu

Singh had been mentioned due to animosity in the village.

6.

P.W.-4 - Mahesh Singh stated that the wedding of his daughter

Priyanka was being solemnized on 22.04.2016. During orchestra

performance at about 11:00 - 12:00 at night, persons from the Barat as

well as his family members were firing gun-shots. At that time, he was

inside the house and was not present at the spot. He did not see the

accused firing from his pistol.

7.

He was declared to be a hostile witness and in his cross-

examination, he denied having made the statement under Section 161

3

Cr.P.C. to the Investigating Officer. He further said that in the wedding of

his daughter, several persons from the Barat as well as from his