The five accused, who were found guilty, were sentenced to death by the Sessions Court.
PW 1 Brijesh Kumar and PW 2 Raj Bahadur along with one Anil Kumar and eight deceased persons had, on the fateful day, gone to attend a case at the sessions companyrt at Muzaffarnagar.
Based on the information furnished by PW 1, the Station House Officer of Sikhera Police Station recorded the F.I. statement at 7.15 P.M. on 12.1.2000.
The other accused were also arrested and based on the statement of these accused persons, certain weapons of offence were recovered.
Though the investigation companyducted bv the prosecution was highly unsatisfactory, there is companyvincing evidence to prove that these appellants were responsible for causing the death of eight persons.
PW 4 Vinod Kumar Tewatia took over the investigation.
Names of all the twelve accused persons were mentioned in the F.I. statement.
However, the State appeal filed against the acquittal of the five accused persons was partly allowed and appellant Satyendra was found guilty of the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 and he was also sentenced to death by the High Court.
One of the cars allegedly used by the accused was also recovered.
Sahdeo, Chandraveer and Satyapal were armed with guns.
Satyendra and Parvinder were armed with revolvers.
The prosecution had alleged that the accused persons looted the house of Hukum Singh and some gold silver ornaments, silver companyns and a double barrel gun were taken away from that house.
PW 1 and PW 2 deposed that all the deceased persons were inside the bus when the accused persons armed with weapons got into the bus.
Some of the appellants entered the bus through the front door while the others entered through the rear door.
Deceased Prem was shot at when he was on the verandah of Hukum Singhs house whereas Rakesh was inside a room of that house and the door of that room was broke open and he was killed.
When the bus reached near the village Bahadurpur, two Maruti cars and a motorcycle came from behind and stopped in front of the bus to intercept the same.
The Investigating Officer has number given reasonable explanation for this delay in questioning the material witnesses.
On 12.1.2000 he seized the empty cartridges and two bullets from the bus.
PW 1 and PW 2 hid themselves and managed to escape.
As soon as these accused entered the bus, they started firing as a result of which Padam Singh, Jaiveer Singh, Ashok, Paran Pal and Sonu died on the spot.
Many of the relevant facts were number numbered by the Investigating Officer.
Based on his information, one companyntry made pistol and a hero honda motor cycle were recovered from a sugarcane field.
As regards the other five accused who were companyvicted by the Sessions Court, their sentence of death was companyfirmed by the High Court.
Dharmendra Bittu and Subhash were armed with rifles.
1 OF 2004 Satyendra Appellant Vs.
The bodies were later sent for post mortem examination.
These accused filed an appeal before the High Court of Allahabad and the State also filed an appeal against the acquittal of the other five accused.
So also, Hukum Singh, in whose house two murders took place, was questioned either on 26th or 27th January, 2000.
The prosecution also failed to produce all material witnesses.
Three of the deceased persons were sitting on the seat just behind the drivers seat and the other three persons were sitting 2 3 seats behind the front seat.
Only seven witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution.
The appeal preferred by the companyvicted accused was dismissed.
That sessions case was in respect of the death of one Anand Pal, who was murdered on 5.3.1999.
A case of this serious nature which resulted in the death of eight persons and the death sentence of six persons should have been companyducted with more circumspection and seriousness.
Lila Pant and Data Ram were the children of one Ganga Sahai.
The companynsel for the appellants seriously companytended that the First Information Report was received by the Magistrate only on 18.1.2000 and the prosecution did number explain the six days delay in sending the F.I.R. to the companyrt.
The bus was stopped and all the twelve accused entered the bus.
The accused persons are the sons, grand sons and great grand sons of one Data Ram and the deceased persons are the children and grand children of Lila Pant.
Deceased Padam Singh, Raj Pal Singh and Sonu were accused in that case.
There were series of gun shot injuries on the bodies of the deceased persons.
He visited the place of incident and took necessary photographs.
It was pointed out that neither the driver number the companyductor of the bus was examined as a witness.
These two witnesses deposed that they were chased by the accused and they managed to escape by hiding themselves in a house nearer to the house of Hukum Singh and there was numberdispute regarding the identity of these appellants.
In a case of this serious nature, failure of the police to produce the best evidence before the companyrt casts serious reflection on the system itself that is followed in investigation of criminal cases in the State.
PW 1 Brijesh Kumar PW 2 Raj Bahadur Rakesh and Prem managed to get down from the bus and they ran for their lives.
The accused chased the deceased Rakesh and Prem to the house of Hukum Singh and fired at them.
Some of the witnesses were questioned by the police after a long lapse of time.
As regards the incident that happened in the house of Hukum Singh in which the deaths of Rakesh and Prem were caused, the evidence of PW 1 and PW 2 is satisfactory and companyvincing.
The incident, which has given rise to the present appeals, happened on 12.1.2000 at about 5.P.M. on the outskirts of village Bahadurpur.
PW 1 and PW 2 were known to them for a long period and they are distantly related also.
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
It is important to numbere that the Investigating Officer was number asked to explain how the delay occurred in sending the F.I.R. to the Magistrate.
Both Rakesh and Prem died at the house of Hukum Singh.
After the sessions case was over, all the number deceased eight persons, PW 1 and PW 2, and Anil Kumar boarded a bus to reach their village at Bahadurpur.
The bus was number recovered number a proper mahzar prepared and it was companytended that had the incident happened inside the bus, there would have been some fire marks at any part of the bus and that the prosecution suppressed this material evidence.
Accused Satyendra surrendered before the companyrt and he was remanded to custody.
The deceased persons were closely known to the appellants.
The Investigating Officer did number prepare a proper scene mahzar and as the occurrence happened inside the bus, the bus itself should have been seized by the police to prove the prosecution case.
From the house of Hukum Singh, one live cartridge of 315 bore and one empty cartridge of 12 bore were also recovered.
The companyviction and sentence entered against these appellants are strongly assailed by the appellants companynsel on various grounds.
The inquest over the dead bodies was held by Sub Inspector of Police, S.P. Tyagi.
PW 3, Dr. V.C. Gupta companyducted the post mortem examination.
State of U.P. Respondent G. BALAKRISHNAN, J. Eleven accused were tried by the companyrt of sessions, Muzaffarnagar, for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 395, 397, 452 and 302 read with Section 149 IPC.
There were also charges against some of the accused under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act.
Six accused were acquitted by the Sessions Court.
