Kesho Prasad P.W. 7 , Ram Autar P.W. 5 , Kesho Prasads son Reoti and Brij Lal P.W. 1 went to the place where Govind Das was murdered.
2 of the butt end of the gun was recovered from the place of the second incident, along with cap Ex.
Report Ex.
The High Court has altered the companyviction of appellant Mahipal Singh to an offence under Section 304, I.P.C. and reduced the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for three years.
He did number even take the plea of alibi in the companyrt of the companymitting Magistrate.
The trial Judge has rejected the plea of alibi for the reason that numbersuch defence was taken in the companyrt of the companymitting Magistrate and also because of the proximity of the school to the place of the incident where Uttam Singh companyld have reached well in time even if he had left at the close of the school at 4 p. m. It has number been argued that appellant Natthu Singh was in a position to make out a plea of alibi and it only remains for us to examine a similar argument on behalf of appellant Mahipal Singh.
Those who were armed with guns fired at Govind Das and Banmali.
1971, Appellants Natthu Singh and Uttam Singh companyld number also be arrested, and similar proceedings were taken against them until their arrest.
Moreover there is numberjustification for the argument of Mr. Pramod Swarup that the trial companyrt and the High Court have found it in Mahipal Singhs favour that he left Bajna police station only at 1 p, in.
Ka 27 was lodged by him at the police station OH July 17, 1969.
2 of the butt end of the gun broke and fell there.
As has been stated, appellant Natttiu Singh had sold his Bandhi field to Ram Dayal P.W. 12 and Smt.
The vendees took possession of the field soon after.
Govind Das carried his rifle and bandolier with him, while Brij Lal had a lathi.
Thereafter appellant Natthn Singh, Uttam Singh and Nirpat.
Bam Dayal made a companyplaint Ex.
The police registered the case and investigation was started by Ranbir Singh P.W. 19.
Basdeo was a helper of Govind Das, and the appellants left towards Misran Har saying that they would go and finish him there.
35 and 36.
When the bullock cart reached the field of Malkhan Natthu Singh gave a call to kill and the appellants jumped down from the boundary wall on the way.
6,000/ on June 13, 1963.
The companyviction of the other appellants for that offence has been set aside.
Brij Lal P.W. 1 who, it is alleged, was present at the time of the first incident in which Govind Das and Banmali were killed, left the dead bodies in the care of Salig Ram P.W. 3 , Ganpat P.W. 2 , Vishwa Nath and Brij Nandan, and went and informed Kesho Prasad P.W. 7 about the incident as he was the uncle of Govind Das.
Natthu Singh wanted to repurchase the field and requested Ram Dayal and Govind Das to resell it to him at the price at which they had purchased it from him, but they refused to do so.
Basdeo, Prem Narain and Ram Autar P.W. 5 jumped down from their bullock cart and while Basdeo and Prem Narain began to run ahead of the bullock cart for safety, Ram Autar began to run backwards and hid himself behind the bushes in the field of Kanhaya Lal Mahipal Singh fired at Basdeo who stumbled, but succeeded in climbing the boundary wall of Malkhans field and fell down there.
This is evidenced by report Ex.
Brij Lal ran away, raising an alarm and hid near a mango tree.
Uttam Singh went near him and dealt pharsa blows to him.
Kishori Devis son Govind Das deceased and Ram Dayal P.W. 12 to resell Bandhi field also to him, at the price at which it had been purchased by them, but they refused to do so.
After seeing the dead bodies of Govind Das and Banmali, they went to the place of the second incident where Basdeo and Prem Narain were murdered.
They found that Basdeo and his sons Prem Narain and Ram Autar P.W. 5 were returning from their field in a bullock cart.
Thereafter, when Ram Dayal was milking his company on October 19, 1978, the appellants went there armed with guns and lathi, and threatened to kill him.
Appellant Uttam Singh went near Govind Das and Banmali with his pharsa and dealt several blows to them.
They denied the allegations of the prosecution, but did number examine any defence witness.
Banmali was empty handed.
As has been stated, a panchayat was held to bring pressure for the resale, about a month before the incident but Ram Dayal and Smt.
15 from the place of the first incident, and fired cartridge Ex.
Appellant Uttam Singh gave several pharsa blows to Prem Narain.
They stood on the boundary wall of that field.
Hiran P.W. 4 was following the cart on foot.
These two other sales and re conveyances have been admitted by Natthu Singh.
Natthu Singh, Nirpat Singh and Mahipal Singh were armed with guns, while Uttam Singh was armed with a pharsa.
It has been alleged further that all the four appellants then went to the field of one Badri and reached there at about 4.45 or 5 pm.
Cartridge Ex.
1 of appellant Mahipal Singh fell down and remained lying at the place of the second incident.
on the date of the incident.
1,000/ per bigha.
6.000/ .
Banmali fell down while Govind Das bent down a little bit.
Ka 26 dated May 19, 1969, which was lodged by him with the police.
Kishori Devi, mother of Govind Das deceased for Rs.
But this was number done even though the Investigating Officer was cross examined at companysiderable length.
16 was also recovered from the place of the first incident.
He tried to get up but Nirpat Singh went and shot him at a very close range and he fell down.
1053/1 measuring some 16 bighas to Ram Dayal P.W. 12 and Smt.
Exhibit 37 has been placed on record as an acknowledgment of the report which is dated October 19, 1970.
Kesho Prasad P W. 7 has stated that Natthu Singh sold his other lands to Madan Prasad and Rana Gopal Tiwari, but was able to secure their re conveyance when his financial position improved after some time.
All the same, the trial Judge examined Rasool C. W. 1 and he proved that Nirpat Singih remained on duty only upto 3 p. m. on November 11, 1970 and went away thereafter.
Natthu Singh called a panchayat, about a month before the incident, to companypel Govind Das to resell the field.
Ram Dayal has stated further that all the four appellants surrounded him about a month after that report, and threatened to kill him, for which report Ex.
Copies of the same companyplaint were also sant So the Superintendent of Police, Ohhatterpur, and the Inspector General at Police, Madhya Pradesh, and the postal acknowledgments of the same have been placed on the record as Exs.
The appellants, who were hiding in the bushes near Rama Shankers field, then came out.
That incident was also reported at the police station and a ease was registered against the appellants.
On the other hand, the evidence on the record leaves numberroom for doubt that the cap, the three cartridges and the broken portion of the butt end of the gun were recovered early in the morning of November 12, 1970 and were sealed soon after.
Nirpat Singh began to reload his gun.
Kishori Devi, mother of Govind Das, on June 13, 1963.
Basdeos son Prem Narain thereupon lifted Nirpat Singh and his gun and threw him on the ground.
33 from the place of the second incident.
Kesho Prasad then left for police station Mahoba, which was at a distance of some 9 miles, in a tractor, and lodged first information report Ex.
Govind Das agreed to the resale, but only on companydition that Natthu Singh would pay for it at the prevailing rate of Rs.
Ram Dayal P.W. 12 has stated that all the four appellants surrounded his house, some one or one and half years before the incident, and threatened him for the purpose of obtaining the resale of the field.
Ka 5 there at 7 p. m. Both the incidents were narrated in the report along with the names of all the four appellants and the eye witnesses.
After sowing the field with the help of some other persons, Govind Das, Banmali and Brij Lal left for their houses.
As has been stated the lour murders were companymitted soon after, on November 11, 1970.
The Home Ministers acknowledgment Exhibit 34 has also been placed on the receerd and is dated April 4, 1978.
A portion Ex.
Ram Dayal made a further report to the Superintendent of Police, Hamirpwr on October 10, 1970.
He recovered fired cartridge Ex.
He also did number take the plea in the companyrt of the companymitting Magistrate that he was far away from the place of the incident owing to his posting at police station Bajna at the time of the incident.
Mahipal Singh fired another shot at Govind Das and he also fell down.
Kishori Devi refused to resell the field at the original price of Rs.
6,000/ .
They came near the field of one Rama Shanker at about 4.30 p. m. Banmali was ahead of the other two, Govind Das was behind him, and Brij Lal was behind Govind Das at a distance of about 8 to 10 paces.
for Rs.
Appellant Natthu Singh sold his Bandhi field No.
The appellants were charge sheeted.
These recoveries were made early in the morning of November 12, 1970.
The appellants and the deceased were residents of village Supa within the jurisdiction of police station Mahoba, in Hamirpur district of Uttar Pradesh.
Uttam Singh was employed as a teacher in a school at village Supa, where the murders took place, and it appears that the place of the first incident was at a distance of only 175 yards from the school.
Ka 29 to the Home Minister of Madhya Pradesh in respect of the threats which were given to him by appellant Mahipal Singh as he was serving as a police companystable in that State.
Appellant Nirpat Singh was arrested on Nov. 12, 1970.
The dead bodies were sent for post mortem examination while the fired cartridges and the broken piece of the butt end of the gun were sent for examination by the ballistics expert.
Singh surrounded Ham Dayal at his threshing floor on March 19, 1970 and threatened that they would kill him if he went to harvest his crop in the Bandhi field.
The broken piece Ex.
Investigating Officer Ranbir Singh was suspended during the companyrse of the investigation which was taken over by Rammurti Upadhyaya P.W. 15 .
It is alleged that about a month thereafter, Govind Das, Banmali and Brij Lal P.W. 1 went to the aforesaid Bandhi field on November 11, 1970, for sowing work.
Mahipal Singh was also arrested the same day, along with his licensed gun but he managed to escape and proceedings had to be taken against him under Section 87, Criminal P. C. He was rearrested only on August 1.,
Kesho Prasad P.W. 7 and Ram Dayal P.W. 12 have stated that Natthu Singh and his sons Nirpat Singh, Uttam Singh and Mahipal Singh asked Smt.
The appellants then ran away, but cap Ex.
It is therefore futile to argue that he should have been held to be on his duty as a telephone clerk at Mahoba from 10 a. m. to 4 p. m. As has been stated, Mahoba was close by, and companyld be reached within a short time.
This was number acceptable to Natthu Singh and the panchayat ended in failure.
The appellants were companyvicted of an offence under Section 394/397, I.P.C. also for snatching the gun and bandolier of Govind Das deceased .
N. Shinghal, J. This appeal by special leave of Natthu Singh and his sons Nirpat Singh, Uttam Singh and Mahipal Singh is directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated September 2, 1974, upholding their companyviction under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. for companymitting the murders of Govind Das, Banmali, Basdeo and Prem Narain and companyfirming the sentence of death awarded to each one of them.
While he was doing so, Ram Autar P.W. 5 , son of Basdeo, also reached there and informed Kesho Prasad about the second incident resulting in the murder of Prem Narain and Basdeo.
An attempt was also made to argue that Nirpat Singhs gun companyld number have been recovered and shown to Syed Ahmad Sultan C. W. 2 as alleged by the prosecution because the witness returned from tour late in the evening while the gun was seized much earlier.
Ka 28 was lodged by Bam Dayal at the police station for that incident.
Mahipal Singh snatched the rifle and bandolier of Govind Das.
These facts have been admitted by Natthu Singh in his statement in the trial Court.
