Judgment

CHANDRACUD, J. :- These two appeals by special leave arise out of the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad dated April 12, 1973. Three brothers by the name of Sia Ram, Shri Ram and Ram Chandra; a woman by the name of Violet; and her son Ramesh were tried by the learned Sessions Judge Farrukhabad, in connection with the murder of one Kunwar Singh. The learned judge convicted Sia Ram under Section 302, Penal Code and sentenced him to death. Violet was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 109 and was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The remaining three accused were acquitted by the Sessions Court. Sia Ram and Violet challenged their conviction by filing an appeal in the High Court while the State of U. P. filed an appeal against the acquittal of Shri Ram, Ram Chandra and Ramesh. The High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence of Sia Ram and Violet. It dismissed the appeal filed by the State Government except in regard to Shri Ram whom it convicted under Section 302 read with Section 109. He was sentenced to imprisonment for life.

2. The incident in question took place at about 5 p. m. on October 20. 1970. The deceased Kunwar Singh was a practicing lawyer and after finishing his work for the day he left the Fatehgarh court along with two brother-lawyers, Birendra Singh Yadav and Om Prakash Dubey. They were proceeding on their bicycles and as they reached a spot near Barhpur Block, Violet is alleged to have shouted: "The Vakil has come". Sia Ram and his companions who were hiding behind a Shisham tree came out and confronted Kunwar Singh and his companions. Sia Ram, Ram Chandra and Shri Ram are alleged to have been armed with guns while Ramesh and an unknown person were carrying hockey sticks. Sia Ram fired a shot from a point blank range as a result of which Kunwar Singh fell down. All the accused thereafter ran away. Brijndra Singh removed Kunwar Singh to a nursing home but the latter succumbed to his injury at 5.25 p. m. The other lawyer, Om Prakash Dubey, contacted the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police vainly attempting to have the dying declaration of Kunwar Singh recorded.

3. A person called Soney Lal, also alleged to be an eye-witness, lodged the First Information Report at the police station at about 5-45 p. m. The Superintendent of Police K. N. Daruwala reached the spot of occurrence shortly before 6 p. m. R. N. Singh, the Sub-Inspector, held an inquest on the dead body of Kunwar Singh and sent it for post-mortem examination. Dr. Rizvi who performed the post-mortem examination found a firearm wound on the left upper chest of the deceased. There were tattooing and scorching marks around the injury.

4. The evidence of Brijendra Singh Yadav (P. W. 4) is clear on the part played by the appellant Sia Ram. That evidence shows that Sia Ram fired a shot from his gun as a result of which Kunwar Singh fell down and died within half an hour. Brijendra Singh s evidence has been accepted by both the courts and we are unable to see any valid reason for rejecting it. Brijendra Singh is a natural witness for he, like the deceased Kunwar Singh, had left the court after the court hours. Apart from the fact that he was a colleague of the deceased he was not in any manner concerned with the deep-seated enmity between the appellant Sia Ram and the deceased. The order of conviction and sentence in regard to Sia Ram must therefore be confirmed.

5. Different considerations, however, arise in regard to Violet. The only part attributed to her is that on seeing Kunwar Singh she shouted: "The Vakil has come". It is difficult to believe that Violet was assigned the particular role, especially when Sia Ram and his companions could themselves have detected the presence of Kunwar Singh more easily and with lesser ado. Violet s brother Ramesh, a lad of 16, could have with greater ease and effectiveness played the swift role of alerting the assailants of Kunwar Singh. But the Sessions Court and the High Court hav