Incised wound 5 cm x 3 cm on right side abdomen just right to umblicus, bowle and omentum companying out from the wounds.
In the opinion of the Doctor the death was caused as a result of shock and haemorrhage due to antemortem injuries.
There appeared to be a partition of landed property among the three brothers, namely, Harish Chandra, Lala Ram Sarup and Roshan Lal.
From the analysis of the prosecution story and injury caused by the respondent, namely, injury No.
The Doctor opined that the injuries Nos.
Abrasion 1 cm x 0.5 cm size on the front surface of lower part of left knee joint, pinkish.
The High Court, however, altered the companyviction under Section 302 IPC into one under Section 304 Part I IPC and reduced the sentenced to 7 years R.I. Aggrieved thereby this appeal by special leave is preferred by the State of U.P. The prosecution story in brief is as follows Harish Chandra and Lala Ran Sarup deceased and first informant, Roshan Lal, were three brothers.
The deceased Lala Ram Sarup was medically examined by Dr. A.K. Jain, P.H.C., Amroha on 15.1.1988 at 4 p.m. and found the following injuries Incised wound 2.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep on back of left forearm, 4 cm proximal to wrist joint, oblique and pinkish.
On being raised alarm witnesses Harnam Singh, Kishan Lal, Ram Sarup and his wife Smt.
It is alleged that the accused Murli was armed with a knife, Harish Chandra with a handle of hand pump and Som Nath with dandas in their hands attacked and over powered Lala Ram Sarup and on exhortation of Harish Chandra, the respondent Murli gave knife blows to Lal Ram Sarup.
A case was registered under Section 307 IPC at 5 p.m. on 15.1.1988 itself.
The trial companyrt after examining the prosecution evidence threadbare including the dying declaration and testimony of the witnesses companyvicted the two accused as aforesaid.
It is stated that on 15.1.19 88 at about 3 p.m. when deceased Lala Ram Sarup was going towards his field and reached near the field of Pradhan Harnam Singh, Harish Chandra and his three sons suddenly appeared at the scene from their hideout.
Harish Chandra had three sons, Murli respondent herein, Som Nath and Chandra Pal.
3 was caused by blunt object.
The Doctor further opined that injuries Nos.
There was a dispute between Lala Ram Sarup on one side and Harish Chandra and his sons on the other side with regard to the companystruction of mend in between their fields.
K. Sema, J. Heard the parties.
A3 Chandra Pal and A4 Som Nath were acquitted by the trial companyrt.
So far the appeal preferred by A1 Murli is companycerned, the High Court accepted the evidence of the prosecution recorded by the trial companyrt.
Harish Chandra along with his sons was residing at Moradabad whereas Lala Ram Sarup and Roshan Lal were living in village Badawala within local limits of Amroha township.
2 was described as of grievous nature and dangerous to life also.
1 and 2 were caused by a sharp edged weapon and injury No.
1 and 3 were simple in nature and injury No.
