It then companysidered the evidence of the three eye witnesses to ascertain whether it companyld be safely relied upon to base a companyviction.
At or about 2 P.M. when the cart had, after crossing a culvert situated on the kachha road, reached near the field of one Ram Autar, the five accused persons came out from behind a heap of straws armed with deadly weapons including guns.
The reasons which weighed with the trial Court to disbelieve the evidence of the eye witnesses and, for that matter the prosecution case, are as under The testimonies of the eye witnesses stood companytradicted by their earlier statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.
Thereafter the miscreants fled away alongwith the gun of the deceased.
Besides, the prosecution examined the doctor, who held post mortem examination upon the deceased, the Investigating Officer and some other formal witnesses.
Achal Kumar P.W.1 then rushed to Bilsanda Police Station, which was at a distance of one mile, and lodged an information about the incident.
He went to the scene of occurrence accompanied by other police personnel and after holding inquest upon the dead body sent it for post mortem examination.
P.C. ii Though, according to the eye witnesses, the deceased was attacked while going along the sait road his dead body was found in the field of Ram Autar and numberexplanation was offered by the prosecution to reconcile the anomaly iii Even though the Investigating Officer admitted that he knew from the very beginning about the importance of the place from where the shots were fired he did number indicate that place in the site plan he prepared and such failure made the investigation faulty and suspicious iv No attempt was made by the Investigating Officer to ascertain to whom the pair of shoes found near the dead body belonged and A number of documents were filed on behalf of the accused persons to show that the deceased had enmity with other persons also and, therefore, it companyld number be said that they were the only persons who were likely to companymit the murder of Jitendra Nath, more so when he was armed with a gun.
In reversing the order of acquittal and passing the impugned order the High Court first reappraised the evidence in the light of the above findings and demonstrated that each of them was perverse.
During the pendency of the appeal Avdesh and Surya prakash died and companysequently their appeal abated.
On that information a case was registered against the accused persons and Inspector R. Thapalyal P.W.6 took up investigation.
On companypletion of investigation he submitted chargesheet against the accused persons and in due companyrse the case was companymitted to the Court of Session.
The gun which the deceased was carrying also fell down.
On such companysideration the High Court found that PWs 1 and 2 were the most probable and natural witnesses and that their evidence was credit worthy.
P.C. Shorn of details the prosecution case is that on February 11, 1977 the deceased, his son Achal Kumar P.W.1 and his servant Devi Ram P.W.2 were carrying sugarcane in a bullock cart from their village Mar to a mill in Bilsanda for getting the same weighed.
He prepared a site plan and seized some blood stained earth, two pellets and one pair of shoes from the site.
The above order of companyviction and sentence is under challenge in this appeal preferred under Section 379 Cr.
While P.Ws.
Then the appellant No.1 fired a shot at Jitendra Nath felling him down.
The accused persons pleaded number guilty to the charges levelled against them and their defence was that they had been falsely implicated.
To sustain the charges levelled against the accused persons the prosecution relied upon the ocular accounts of Achal Kumar P.W.1 and Devi Ram P.W.2 , who were allegedly in the cart, and Daya Ram P.W.3 who claimed that he was passing along the road at the material time.
On the exhortation of Avinash and Avdesh, the appellant No.2 also fired a shot hitting Jitendra Nath.
K. MUKHERJEE,J. Jagdish Narain, the appellant No.1, alongwith his two sons Avdhesh and Avinash and two friends Rameshwar Dayal, the appellant No.2, and Surya Prakash was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pilibhit, for rioting and murder of his step brother Jitendra Nath.
1 and 2 were in the bullock cart with the latter driving it, the deceased was following the cart on foot.
The trial ended in an acquittal and aggrieved thereby the State preferred an appeal.
