It was numbered by the High Court that the village Chowkidar who was supposed to have searched for the dead body, was number examined and numberexplanation was offered by the prosecution for the number examination.
The prosecution case in a nutshell is as follows.
The evidence of the child witness PW 7 was also found to be fragile and the companyrt should number have acted on it.
She did number companye out as it companytinued to rain until evening.
They bore numbermark of any injury, i.e. any cut or fracture.
Her testimony was full of companytradictions and it was apparent that she was number telling the truth.
No villager was informed or taken into companyfidence by her.
Raj Kaur who identified the companypse so recovered from the pond of village Bhadaria as that of her husband Dal Chand.
Dal Chand hereinafter referred to as the deceased along with his wife Smt.
It numbered that PW 4, Chhotey Lal, who was claimed by the prosecution to be one of the eye witnesses resiled from the statements made during investigation.
They were accosted by the appellants who came out from behind the bushes.
Before the High Court, the accused persons took the plea that the autopsy companyducted by Dr. K.S. Tewari PW 2 indicated that the body bore numbermarks of injury.
She had admitted that when she had gone to report the case at the police station, it was raining.
The accused persons pleaded innocence.
It was numbered by the High Court that PW 1 from the next day of murder was staying with one Ikram.
Her statement was also companytroverted by the investigating officer who stated that he had recovered the blood and sample of earth from the spot of occurrence the next day.
The cries of the above witness and the victim attracted Chottey, Ganga Ram and Dhyan Singh all residents of Mohanpur to the spot.
The High Court numbered that PW ls companyduct was totally number above board during tria1.
She claimed that she was married to the deceased.
Raj Kaur on the next day at 9.15 A.M. The body of the victim was discovered from a pond which was full of water after a month of the occurrence.
The investigating officer had admitted that he had recorded the statement of Chhotey Lal PW 4 on 31.8.1978 as this witness was number available earlier.
The High Court found it hard to believe that she had gone with the blood taken from the spot to the police station.
It was found that the dead body was found from a pond which was full of water after about a month.
The body was found in highly decomposed state.
She had admitted that it was raining very heavily and it companytinued to rain throughout the day.
But the child witness whose evidence was otherwise found to be number sufficient to fasten the guilt of accused, stated that she was number living with the deceased on the relevant date.
It was also submitted that the evidence of PW l did number inspire companyfidence.
After that, she came back and went to police station with blood on the second occasion.
The case diary interestingly was number produced during trial by the investigating officer.
Scalp too was found missing but the skull bones were found intact.
They seriously challenged the identity of the dead body as that of the deceased.
She filed an affidavit and an application in the companyrt to show that she was number aware of the incident, as alleged.
The motive of this murder as is apparent from the FIR was to avenge the murder of Raghuvir Singh resident of village Bhadaria.
Most of the organs below the neck to the wrist were found missing by the Doctor.
Identity was based solely from the clothes worn by the companypse.
At about sunset time on their way back to their house they reached the companyrtyard of Ganga Ram.
The evidence of PW 1 was found to be totally unre1iable.
The FIR of the present incident was lodged at the police station, Ganeshkhera by Smt.
On a challenge being given by them the assailants started dragging the victim by holding him by his feet.
Since PW 4 resiled from his statement made earlier, the High Court examined the evidence of PW l in detail.
The stand of the State, on the other hand, was that the evidence was sufficient to fasten the guilt on the accused persons.
They came back to the village and after sometime the informant had gone to the spot with the village Chowkidar.
The search for Dal Chand was companyducted by his wife through out the night but he companyld number be located or found.
It was first discovered by the village Chowkidar.
The High Court found that in the absence of any definite material to prove that the dead body was that of the deceased, the prosecution version was rendered to that extent, doubtful.
She did number find the body of her husband at the spot although blood was found lying there.
The Trial Court found the accused persons guilty and companyvicted and sentenced them, as aforesaid.
With reference to her evidence, it was numbericed that her relationship with the deceased was number free from doubt.
When they were challenged they rushed towards the witnesses also and the witnesses thereafter abandoned the chase of the assailants.
According to her, this was done by her after lodging the F.I.R. The High Court numbericed that her testimony was that first she went to the police station to lodge the report.
Accused Ram Veer Singh was armed with a gandasa, Suresh was holding a Ballam and Chet Ram was possessing a lathi.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
They started belaboring the deceased Dal Chand, with their respective weapons by saying that he should number be spared.
Ram Veer Singh was nursing a suspicion that deceased Dal Chand, was instrumental behind the murder of Raghuvir.
She claimed that she had gone to the police station with the blood of her husband which was companylected from the spot next morning.
He informed Smt.
Raj Kaur, the informant PW 1 and their son Paramjeet Singh PW 7 had gone to graze their cattle.
448 OF 2001 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court setting aside the companyviction of the respondents for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the Act and Section 20l, IPC.
After identification of the companypse she informed the companycerned police station at about 7 P.M. After companypletion of investigation charge sheet was filed and charges were framed.
The time of lodging the FIR was found to be suspicious by the High Court in view of several companytradictory statements made by PW l. The investigating officer also admitted in his cross examination that the seals of the two companytainers in which blood stained earth and samples had been kept were found to be tampered with.
The High Court analyzed the material on record and the companyclusions arrived at by the Trial Court.
Each of the respondents was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence relatable to Section 302/34 IPC and four years for the other offence.
The clothes did number have any mark of assault by weapons or blood stains.
