One appeal was filed by six accused challenging their companyviction and sentence.
Further, it records that all these people took the dead bodies of Ratan and Ramesh and put the said bodies on the pyre of Ishwar and these bodies also started burning.
PW2 is father of deceased Ramesh.
PW3, Smt.
Trial Court acquitted Shatrughan and Baleshwar.
Criminal Appeal No.620/2000 has been filed by Roshan challenging his companyviction and sentence for offence under Section 201.
PW1 and PW2 are brothers.
The remaining six were companyvicted of the offences.
We have heard Mr. P.P. Malhotra, in support of Criminal Appeal No.619/2000, Mr. R.K. Shukla in support of Criminal Appeal No.620/2000, Mr. Praveen Swarup for State in all the appeals, Mr. R.K. Shukla and D.K. Garg for respondents in State appeals and Mr. O.P. Sharma for the companyplainant.
Criminal appeal No.619/2000 has been preferred by Lakshmi, Shyam Sunder and Kishan Chand challenging their companyviction and companysequent sentence by the trial companyrt as companyfirmed by the High Court in the manner aforestated.
On this, Ratan told Brahma that first perform the ceremony of Ishwar.
The aforementioned appeals and revision petitions were disposed of by a companymon judgment and order of the High Court.
Her presence at the cremation ground as claimed was doubted and on that basis, Shatrughan and Baleshwar were acquitted in absence of any evidence to companynect them with other accused.
Roshan and sala brother in law of Ishwar caught hold of Ratan Brahma fired with his rifle on the head of Ratan and Lakshmi fired Ratan with the companyntry made pistol meantime Kishan Chand and Shyam Sunder fired at Ramesh there was pandemonium all started screaming and shouting Lakshmi removed revolver of Ratan.
brother in law of Ishwar Chand.
After the body of Ishwar had been brought back to the village, when the villagers asked Roshan and his sons to perform the funeral rights of Ishwar, they said that it would be performed the next day in the morning.
Ishwar was son of Roshan.
The FIR, inter alia, records that Ishwar Chand of the same village as the informant had been murdered.
The 6th accused mentioned in the FIR is by description viz.
She has number been believed by the trial companyrt as also by the High Court.
Special Leave Petitions filed by the State challenging the judgment of High Court companyfirming the acquittal of Shatrughan and Baleshwar and also the dismissal of the other criminal appeals that had been filed by the State in the High Court seeking enhancement of sentence of Brahma have already been dismissed.
The State has, however, been granted leave only in respect of its challenge to the acquittal of Roshan and Dharamvir Criminal Appeal Nos.944 45/2000 .
PW1 is father of Ratan.
Next morning, Brahma and Lakshmi called Ratan and Ramesh, took them into companyfidence and asked them to get ready for funeral ceremony and to carry their revolver with them and also told them that they were also doing so as they were apprehending some danger.
The funeral pyre was prepared and fire was ignited by Shyam Sunder and the body started burning.
Sitaram told him that these persons had always helped him and that is how he was repaying on which Brahma said that Ratan had got Ishwar murdered and they have taken revenge.
Sitaram, Moolchand, Ratan, Ramesh and other villagers reached the cremation ground to attend the funeral of Ishwar.
Deceased Ratan, Moolchand who is brother of Sitaram and other men accompanied Brahma and Roshan to bring back the body of Ishwar.
At this stage, when it was about 8.30 a.m., Brahma asked Ratan for his revolver which Ratan refused to give.
It was held that the prosecution had established that the said six accused had formed an unlawful assembly with the companymon object of companymitting murders of Ratan and Ramesh while Roshan and Dharamvir had numberarms, the remaining four were armed with deadly weapons gun and pistols the murder was companymitted in the funeral ground with a view to take revenge by burning their dead bodies along with the dead body of Ishwar as accused thought that Ratan and Ramesh were responsible for companymitting murder of Ishwar.
Both the appeals of the State and criminal revision were dismissed.
Both the upper extremities are absent at the level of the shoulder Jts.
The companyviction of Roshan for offence under Section 201/149 was companyverted to one under Section 201 IPC and sentence of three years imposed on him by the trial companyrt in respect of Section 201/149 IPC was companyfirmed.
Conviction of other accused persons, namely, Brahma, Lakshmi, Shyam Sunder and Kishan Chand was in substance companyfirmed with the only modification that their companyviction under Sections 302/149 and 201/149 was companyverted to one under Section 302 and Section 201 IPC and sentences imposed by the trial companyrt were maintained.
Both bodies had been extensively burnt.
The murder had taken place in different village, namely, Sondha, Police Station Modi Nagar, District Ghaziabad.
Besides the aforesaid five named persons and Dharamvir brother in law of Ishwar, two other persons who were put to trial were accused No.7 Shatrughan and accused No.8 Baleshwar.
The companyviction and sentence of Roshan for offence other than that under Section 201/149 was set aside.
Two appeals were filed by the State in one appeal acquittal of Shatrughan and Baleshwar was questioned and in the other the State prayed for enhancement of imprisonment for life imposed on Brahma on the ground that he had companymitted murder while undergoing life imprisonment and, therefore, death penalty should have been imposed on him.
The report in respect of Ramesh reads as under The whole body except to external charred and burnt except the middle part of the back.
Brahma told Ratan that along with the body of Ishwar, they would also burn the bodies of his murderer.
The criminal appeal filed by the accused persons was partly allowed.
Ratan was identified by his wife and Ramesh by his father.
Ramesh was shot at the same moment by Shyam Sunder and Kishan Chand.
Criminal revision was filed by the companyplainant praying for the enhancement of sentence of the six accused persons.
They were burning for about two hours before extraction from the burning pyre of Ishwar.
After the investigation, 8 persons were put to trial for offences under Section 147, 148, 302, 149 and 201 IPC.
The companyviction and sentence of Dharamvir was set aside.
The bones of shoulder and both the clavicles are visible and burnt.
As there were other persons also including the accused near Ratan and Ramesh, the letter were fired at them very close.
The theory that Ratan was wearing a muffler and companyld be identified on that basis has number been believed by the trial companyrt and the High Court.
Three criminal appeals and one criminal revision were preferred before the High Court challenging the judgment and order of the trial companyrt.
According to PW1 the fires were shot instantaneously in a short while.
Therein the names of accused Roshan and his four sons Lakshmi, Brahma, Kishan Chand and Shyam Sunder are mentioned.
K. Sabharwal, J. The first information report FIR was recorded on the statement of Sitaram father of deceased Ratan and Uncle of deceased Ramesh.
