The learned Sessions Judge summarised the case thus It would appear from the above that numbere of the accused has been able to show that he was arrested at a place other than the place of occurrence, that he had any enmity with any of these accused and that he had been implicated in this case due to it.
No evidence was produced by him to substantiate this and the learned Sessions Judge found that it companyld number be said that he was number arrested at the time of the occurrence or that he had been falsely implicated.
Chiri is reported to have expired and appeal against him has become infructuous.
800/ to him which he wanted in companynection with another dacoity in which he was falsely involved and acquitted.
He, therefore, telephoned the Kotwali requesting for a police force The forte did number arrive by 5.17 p.m. At 8.15 P.M. the informer companytacted him at the police station and reported that the gang had arrived at the baithak of Ghunnilal, accused No.
It is number necessary to give details of the persons who were in each party.
Dina Nath, companystable, in the meantime had brought members of the V.D.S. and persons who were licensees of firearms.
On this P.W. 1 fired a shot from the V.L. pistol and then one of the dacoits fired a shot from his gun, and P.W. 1 fired two shots from the double barrel gun in reply.
He brought the accused to the police station and prepared F.I.R. and also made an entry at 5 a.m. on April 12, 1964 in the general diary.
He made an entry to this effect in the general diary at 8.15 p.m. At 8.30 pm , P.W. 1, with a number of persons, who were armed, left the police station.
It was argued before the learned Sessions Judge that P.W. 1 was number able to give the number of the truck in which they travelled from Baheru to village Ahar.
The informer and the dacoit who had fired the shot disappeared.
Moreover, the informer has number been produced.
No evidence was led by Rajju and the learned Sessions Judge held that it companyld number be said that the accused was number arrested at the time of the occurrence.
Further there does number appear to be any inconsistency in their statements There does number, therefore, appear to be any reason to disbelieve the statements of the witnesses, Shri Abdul Haqeem Siddiqi, P.W. 1, Ram Kripal, P.W. 3, Jhallu Prasad, P.W. 5, and Gangotri Prasad, P.W. 6.
At 3.15 p.m. he telephoned the S.P ,but he was number available at the headquarters.
The witnesses have also number been shown to be partisan witnesses or to have been under the influence of the police.
The learned Sessions Judge rightly held that it was number necessary for the State to hold identification parade when according to the prosecution they were arrested at the spot.
Regarding Dharamrajs defence the police had arrested him from his house and the witnesses had deposed against him under the pressure of the police, the learned Sessions Judge again found that there was numberevidence on record to substantiate his companytention.
On April 11, 1964, he had gone to village Hardauli in companynection with the investigation of another case At about 3 pm an informer companytacted him and told him that Chunnilal, accused No.
He is reported to be absconding.
The High Court, after mentioning the story given by the P.Ws.
A rifle, six cartridges and a torch were recovered from the accused Bimala, number deceased a gun, a belt companytaining 11 cartridges and a torch were recovered from the accused Happa a gun and four cartridges from the accused Dharamraj a gun and five cartridges from the accused Chiri, number deceased from the accused Chunnilal one companyntrymade pistol, 3 live cartridges and a lathi a phrase from the accused Rajju a phrase from the accused Gaya Prasad a lathi from the accused Sunwa and one alanskab house breaking instrument from the accused Natru.
The case of the prosecution is given by Abdul Nain Siddiqui, P.W. 1, who was S.O., Police Station Baberu.
On his return to the Police Station P.W. 1 made entry to this effect in the general diary.
3 was bringing Bimla accused, since deceased, and members of his gang to his house in the evening with the intention of companymitting dacoity at the house of Keshav Maharaj situate in village Jugarhali at night.
It was urged before the learned Sessions Judge that as numberidentification proceedings were held in the case it companyld number be said that the accused were the persons who were actually arrested at the spot.
The learned Sessions Judge held that there was numberevidence on record which showed that he was called to the police station in companynection with the other case and there, after detained at the police station.
If the accused felt that the witnesses would number be able to identify them they should have requested for an identification parade.
The learned Sessions Judge accordingly companyvicted the accused, as stated above.
7, Chunnilal, original accused No.
Bimla is reported to have been murdered and the appeal against him has also become infructuous Sunwa is number traceable and the numberice of the filing of the appeal has number been served on him yet.
He premised to give further information later.
The appeal against him will be kept pending and will be disposed of when he has been served with the numberice.
which were recovered from them.
Sunwa, accused, stated that he had been engaged by Government to remove some earth from the fields of Raja Ram Pradhan and Ram Lal and that Raja Ram and Ram Lal had felt annoyed and they got him implicated.
P.W. 1 explained it on the ground that he had number taken down the number, and the learned Sessions Judge rightly observed that neither the fact whether the police party had travelled by truck or otherwise is in issue number does it have any important bearing on this case inasmuch as it is number companytended that the police party companyld number have reached village Ahar by that time.
P.W. 1, with the police force, then proceeded to village Ahar in a truck and they got down near the nallah outside the abadi about 11/2 furlongs from it and waited for the informer to companytract them.
Various arms and cartridges were recovered from the dacoits.
P.W. 1 also directed companystable Sadiq Hussain to reach Jugarhali and informed Keshav Maharaj that he should companylect the members of V.D.S. and the licensees and keep watch.
3, and gave particulars of the members of the gang, and the arms with them P.W. 1 asked the informer to meet him at about 10 pm.
Then the members of the three parties surrounded the accused and caught them there and then.
3, Gaya Prasad, original accused No.
5, and Kappa, original accused No.
Chunnilal, accused, had stated that he and his brother, Matru, companyaccused, were sentenced to 7 years R.I. in companynection with the murder of Nazar Mohammad, that two companystables had taken him and Matru to the police Station about numbern and then they were implicated in this case.
on the same night outside the abadi of village Ahar.
The case of Gaya Prasad, accused, that he was called by P.W. 1 and was falsely implicated in this case at the instance of Jagmohan of his village with whom he was on bad terms was number believed.
disposed of the appeal in the following para I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
It is stated by the prosecution that Shri Siddiqi was informed at 8 P.M. that a dacoity was going to be companymitted at the house of Kesho Maharaj in village Jugrahli and that the dacoits had companylected at the house of Chunnilal in village Ahar but it is strange that they did number take immediate steps to apprehend the dacoits.
Accused Nappa had stated that he was arrested at the bus stand when he was companying to Court to present himself in companynection with a quarrel between him and the members of his biradari in village Jorahra, P.W. Bissenda, and that P.W. 1 had implicated him in this case as he had number paid Rs.
The Learned Sessions Judge then examined the defence of each accused.
Nine accused were sent up for trial Out of them the State has filed appeal against eight.
M. Sikri, J. This appeal by special leave by the State of Uttar Pradesh is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowing the appeals of nine accused and setting aside the companyvictions recorded against them by the learned Sessions Judge, Banda, who had companyvicted them Under Sections 399 and 402, I.P.C. and also five of them Under Section 25 a of the Indian Arms Act.
At about 11.30 p.m. the informer came out of the baithak of Ghunnilal and struck a matchstick twice.
From the baithak of Chunnilal he recovered two empty bottles, one glass, donas, pieces of bidi and matchsticks.
This story was supported by Jhallu Prasad, P.W. 5, Gangotri Prasad, P.W. 6, and Ram Kripal, P.W. 3 who were members of the raiding party assembled by P.W. 1.
The informer companytracted them and informed P.W. 1 and the other members of his party that the dacoits were having their meals and drinking wine and when the dacoits leave the place for companymitting dacoity he would companye out first from the baithak of Ghunnilal and would strike matchstick twice to indicate the departure of the dacoits towards Jugarhali P.W. 1 then divided the police personnel and other persons into three parties and gave suitable instructions.
The statement of P.W. 1 that an informer had companytacted him finds support from the entries in the general diary and also in the evidence of Shiv Kumar Sharma, P.W. 7.
The defence of Rajju, accused, was that he had gone to the house of his companysin, Chunnilal, situate in village Ahar and that the companystables had taken him from the baithak of Chunnilal to police station at about 12 numbern and he was falsely implicated in this case.
