The father of the accused Beche Lal and Khargi father of Kalika hereinafter referred to as the deceased who was the informant, were real brothers and they lived separately in two adjoining houses.
Ka 1 was lodged in the police station.
One Ganga Prasad had scribed this report.
A 7 was also prepared.
On the date of the occurrence that is 13.7.1993 at about 7.00 p.m., a Panchayat had been called to settle the dispute in between the two families.
Khargi, the father of the deceased along with other villagers took his injured son Kali Prasad to the police station but on the way to the police station Kali Prasad succumbed to his injuries.
Accused Baijnath ran inside his house.
So the dead body was taken to the police station and a written F.I.R. Ext.
On the basis of this F.I.R. chick report, Ext.
The village Pradhan and many others were also present in the Panchayat.
The dead body was sent for post mortem examination, which was companyducted by Dr. Lalit Kumar P.W.6.
Accused Baijnath gave a lathi blow on the head of the deceased Kali Prasad, who sustained head injury, and on account of this Lathi blow, fell down.
The post mortem report is Ext.
Claims and companynter claims were made by accused and deceased.
Ka 12 was prepared and a case was registered against the accused, number the appellant.
Ka 6 and also recovered the lathi Ext.1 at the instance of the accused.
There was some dispute in between the two families regarding nabdan and fixing of kuntas pegs , which were used for tying the cattle.
Investigation was entrusted to S.O. Rajinder Singh PW.5 S.I S.M. Tewari was directed to companyduct the inquest of the dead body.
Recovery memo Ext.
The companyviction and the sentence were challenged before the High Court which by the impugned order dismissed the appeal.
When accused Baij Nath declared that the disputed land belonged to him and will number be given to the deceased who made a companynter claim.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the companyviction of the appellant for offence punishable under Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC and the sentence of imprisonment for 7 years as awarded by the trial Court and companyfirmed by the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow.
Ka 10.
The inquest report is Ext.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows Accused appellant Baijnath and deceased Kalika Prasad were real companysin.
After companypleting the investigation, charge sheet Ext.
The investigating officer prepared the site map Ext.
The occurrence was witnessed by Ganga Prasad, Thakur Prasad, Brijesh and many others, who were present in the Panchayat.
