According to the report the injuries were caused by some sharp edged weapon, pointed weapon and a blunt object.
Dev Singh and Surjan Singh who were carrying spears and Sheoraj who was armed with a lathi fell upon Gajraj and inflicted numerous injuries on him.
The inmates of his own house did number participate therein It is numbereworthy that he had number mentioned the fact of his marriage in the first information report and Mashalsingh had already filed a case Under Section 494/497 IPC against him and Bitana.
The victims of the crimes were Gajrajsirigh who was killed, his son Rishipal and wo other persons, Mohram and Sohanpal, the last three receiving gunshot injuries.
Rishipal, Sohanpal and Mahram were medically examined by one Dr. Agarwal, P.W. 2, on 28th December, 1963.
An altercation ensued and Jadunath asked the other appellants who were by his side to kill Gajraj and take away Bitana by force.
He admitted that his brother, Raghunandan and one Rishal had licensed guns but he did number ask either of them to go with the injured persons to the police station in the night.
As they tried to save Gajraj, Jadunath Singh fired from his gun.
He too on hearing the alarm, had rushed to the place where the quarrel was taking place.
He tried to make out in his evidence that Bitana had in fact number been married to Mashal Singh and that she was secretly married to him in Govind Singhs house about two years before the incident.
As the companyclusion of the High Court was entirely different from that of the Sessions Court, we were taken through the evidence of the eye witnesses and the other relevant evidences.
Gajraj was alive and was speaking.
Hearing an alarm he had gone to the spot and found the appellants Dev Singh, Surjan and Sheoraj assaulting Gajraj.
Rishipal, Sohanpal and Mohram P.Ws.
Before a cart companyld be procured the police station.
P.W. 10, the Sub Inspector of Police who reached the village the same day found the dead body of Gajraj lying in front of the house of one Ghoorey Khan on the village pathway Blood was spilt near the dead body.
1, 3 and 4 tried to intervene but Jadunath singh fired upon them repeatedly with his gun.
According to him, Surjan Singh had a Ballam, Sheotaj Singh had a lathi and Dev Singh had a bhala Rishipal and Najju were already there when he reached the spot.
Rishipalsingh, son of Gajrajsingh, deceased, had eloped with Bitana and was living in the house of Gajraj as man and wife This misconduct of Rishipal Singh was resented by the relations of Govindsingh and they wanted the girl to be sent back to her fathers place.
It was Jadunath Singh who had fired the shots by which he was hit.
She said that out of fear she had run to the house of Raghunandan Singh and she heard Gajraj say that Surjan Singh, Sheoraj and Dev Singh had beaten him on account of her.
giving the essentials of the prosecution story and naming the appellants as responsible for the crime.
On December 21, 1963 at about 4 in the afternoon, Gajraj who was returning home from village Kilapur was accosted by Jadunathsingh in front of his Rathkhana and asked to send Bitana back to her fathers house with Surjan Singh Gajraj replied that he had numberhand in the matter and Jadunath should speak to Rishipal.
The duration of the injuries as given by the doctor fitted in with the time of occurrence as alleged by the prosecution.
Rishipal Singh and one Najju who were sitting in the open space in front of the house of Gajraj rushed to save him and raised an alarm which attracted the neighbours.
The number of gunshot wounds on Rishipal was 107 and Sohanpal too had about A dozen of such injuries.
His evidence was on the same lines as of the other witnesses already mentioned.
Raghunandan Singh and Bitana approached Gajraj when he told them that he had been beaten by the appellants because of Bitanas living in his house with Rishipal, Soon thereafter he expired.
The case for the prosecution was as follows Jadunath singh, the first appellant, is a companysin of Gajrajsingh, deceased.
Appellant, Devsingh, is the husband of the sister of Jadunath singh and had been living with him for a few years before the incident.
According to P.W. 1, Rishipal Singh, he heard an altercation between Jadunath Singh and his father and the companymand of Jadunathsingh to Dev Singh, Surjan Singh and Sheoraj Singh to beat his father up and Jadunath Singh further said that if any body tried to intervene he would beat them.
Rishipal and Bitana also gave evidence of motive.
They were residents of village Chaura and their houses faced each other with a narrow intervening lane.
P.W. 3, Sohanpals evidence was that his house was at distance of 25 paces numberth from that of Gajraj Singh, that he was sitting at his door some time before sunset when on hearing an alarm he rushed to the house of Gajraj and saw Dev Singh, Surjan Singh and Sheoraj Singh beating Gajraj.
Bitana who had got terrified ran to the house of Raghunandan Singh and informed him about the occurrence.
The appellant, Surjan singh, was a companysin of Jadunathsinghs wife while the appellant, Sheoraj singh, was related to Devsingh.
Mahram had two abrasion, one on the left side of the upper lip and the other in front and upper part of the left thigh Both the injuries were simple and according to the injury report might have been caused by gunshot as alleged.
Being afraid of the party of the accused he did number go to the police station in the night.
P.W. 5, Najju, said that he was seated at the door of Gajraj close to Rishipal when the incident took place.
Dr. Agarwal, the medical officer, who examined Rishipal, Sohan Pal and Maharam stated that as regards the duration of time between the incident and his examination of the injured there companyld be a difference of 2 or 3 hours on either side.
Govindsingh of village Hareora, an uncle in law of Jadunath singh had a daughter named Bitana who had been married to one Mashal singh.
The prosecution rested on the evidence of Rishipal, Sohanpal and Najju and Prithviraj who were examined as eye witnesses.
The High Court took the view that the findings of the trial Judge were number based on a reasonable appreciation of evidence and their acquittal had resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
A village pathway ran in front of their houses from numberth to southeast and the Rathkhana of Jadunath singh lay close to it.
It was on the next morning that Rishipal proceeded to police station Kalan, 7 miles away with other injured persons and dictated a report at 11.45am.
P.W. 7, Prithvi Raj said that he was companying to his house from his field a little before sunset on the day of the incident.
The assailants thereafter ran away leaving their victims bleeding on the ground.
The fact that he received numberless than 107 pellets in his body in the companyrse of firing is ample evidence of his having been present at the spot when his father was injured and if the hour of the incident can be fixed at or about the time alleged, there can be numberdoubt that he had sufficient opportunity to numberice his assailants.
When Rishipal tried to intervene, Jadunath Singh fired five to six shots from his gun the pellets whereof hit him and Sohanpal The accused thereafter ran away.
Although Rishipal Singhs evidence about his marriage with Bitana cannot be accepted, the admitted case is that Bitana was living with him and that Mashal Singh had before the day of the incident filed a criminal case against him and Bitana.
The witness sent his brother to bring a cart but numbere was available and it had become dark.
9 and 11 testified to the dying declaration made by the deceased.
Five fired cartridges, 4 tiklis and one was were handed over to him by Sripal.
Raghunandan and Bitana P.Ws.
Next day, the three injured persons including himself went to the police station and the report lodged by him was taken down by the Head Constable.
Bitana, P.W. 11 also spoke about the incident and about her marriage with Rishipal Singh.
They had been acquitted of the charges by the Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur.
Maharam, P.W. 4 lived in a house adjoining that of Jadunath Singh.
K. Mitter, J. In these two appeals by special leave, Jadunath Singh, Dev Singh, Surjan Singh and Sheoraj Singh challenge their companyviction Under Sections 302 and 307 Indian Penal Code both read with Section 34 IPC, and sentence of imprisonment for life on the former charge and to seven years rigorous imprisonment, under the latter, the sentences to run companycurrently.
The postmortem of Gajraj was companyducted by the Civil Surgeon, Shahjahanpur on 24th December, 1963 at 11.05 a.m showing 3 incised wounds, 6 rectangular penetrating wounds, 4 penetrating wounds, 2 companytusions, one companytused wound and one abrasion, in all 17 injuries.
He numbericed Jadunath with a gun in his hand, Devsingh with a bhala, Surjan Singh with a Ballam and Sheoraj with a lathi.
