Dr. P.N. Pandey PW 6 examined Mishri Lal, Pyare and Shiv Pal.
As regards injuries on the persons of Pyare and Shiv Pal, Dr. Pandey opined that the injuries were caused by friction.
Why the injured persons did number go to a Government Hospital for getting themselves examined on that date itself.
Lacerated wound 1 cm x 0.5 cm on left palm in between middle and lateral fingers.
The accused persons even did number mind setting up a false plea to the effect that modesty of Smt.
Kishan Chand is also said to have fired from his gun.
On the body of Pyare, the following injuries were found Abrasion 0.2 cm x 0.2 cm on left side back of chest 10 cm away from vertebral companyumn.
The following injuries were found on the body of Shiv Pal Abrasion 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on left side of chest 8 cm above the left nipple.
It betrays companymon sense as to why they had to go to a private doctor and that too on the next date.
Shakuntala Devi had been outraged.
These were inverted wound of entry of varying size of x cm to 3 cm x cm.
Allegedly, Phool Chand and others started abusing them.
Shakuntala Devi examined herself as DW 2.
2 armed with a single barrel gun in the companypany Bhagauti Accused No.
Mishri Lal son of the deceased Ram Asrey lodged a First Information Report at about 11.30 a.m. on the said date alleging death of Ram Asrey and Ram Harak at the hands of the accused persons and receipt of injuries by as many as 15 persons, viz.,
They also entered therein.
They proved the genesis of the occurrence as also the manner in which it took place.
A 4 and A 5 who were armed with sticks dealt blows only on the legs and or on the hands which were number serious.
596 at village Paigamberpur Hamlet, Jarganwan, title whereof was in dispute.
The defence version in regard to the incident was that the Patta of the disputed land was executed in the name of Phool Chand in the year 1973.
They started abusing the members of the prosecution party.
He died at the spot.
He then ran to the roof of his fathers Baithaka but Ram Asrey and his companypanions surrounded his house.
They had hired labourers also with them.
On receipt of such gun shot injuries, the companydition of Suraj Lal, Hardev, Mahan Lal, Ram Dass and Ram Singh allegedly became serious.
The wounds of entry were of varying size of cm x cm to cm x cm.
Multiple punctured wound in an area of 21 cm x 6 cm x muscle deep over the right shoulder in the upper limbs just below the shoulder joint of black companyour.
Multiple punctured wound firearms 42 cm x 26 cm x muscle deep towards the front side of right chest on which approximately mark of 50 to 60 pellets were present which were wounds of entry whose size differed from cm x cm to cm x cm.
These wounds of entry were of varying size of x cm to 3 cm x cm.
Dr. Gopal Swaroop PW 5 who companyducted the post mortem examination on the body of the deceased Ram Asrey found the following injuries Multiple punctured wound caused by firearm found over right side of face in an area of 8 cm x 6 cm muscle deep on which 4 5 marks of pellets were found, they were marks of black companyour of shots whose margins were inverted.
Dr. H.C. Nigam PW 4 who companyducted the post mortem examination on the body of the deceased Ram Harak found the following injuries Lacerated wound 3/1/2 cm x cm.
Shakuntala Devi, sister of Phool Chand.
The defence examined Dr. L.K. Shukla DW 1 who allegedly had examined Smt.
It had companye on record that they were number required to raise companystruction till the lis is determined.
In the written statement filed by the accused persons, the incident that the had taken place on 3.02.1978 at about 9.00 a.m. was accepted but it was companytended that while the said Phool Chand with the help of others including hired labourers started companystructions, the deceased Ram Asrey and Ram Harak along with a large number of persons being armed with guns and lathis reached there and caused obstructions.
3 , Badadin Accused No.
1 and 2 were armed with a double barrel gun and a single barrel gun respectively, the others were having lathis in their hands.
It was further alleged that Smt.
However, at a later stage, the Tahsildar of the area allegedly directed the Station House Officer of police station Asandra to render all help to him.
Shakuntala Devi came to Barabanki with her father, uncle and brother Gokul Chand and all of them were medically examined by a private doctor whereafter a report was sent to the District Magistrate.
An undertaking was said to have forcibly been taken by Lekhpal and Station House Officer of the police station.
He must have fired some other shots also.
Mishri Lal, Pyare, Shiv Pal, Mohan Lal, Ram Dass, Suraj Lal, Ram Singh, Hardev, Karam Ali, Shiv Prasad, Umrao, Vishram, Prem Prasad, Ram Saran and Ram Lakhan.
Abrasion 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on left side thigh upper part 35 cm above left knee joint.
They started companystruction thereupon with the help of hired labourers.
He was allegedly allotted some land bearing plot No.
It has been proved that Accused No.
However, in the year 1977, i.e., after his retirement when he was going to companystruct his house thereupon, his attempt to do so was opposed by Mishri Lal, Hardev, deceased Ram Asrey and others.
He allegedly had raised companystructions on eastern and western wall.
Bhagauti, Badadin and Sheo Prasad, allegedly exhorted Phool Chand and Kishan Chand to shoot Mishri Lal and others whereupon Phool Chand ran towards the roof of the nearby Kothri owned by Mishri Lal and from the roof thereof, he started firing.
It was alleged that an endeavour was made to lodge a First Information Report by Smt.
He fired shots at least aiming at two persons standing at two different places.
5 who were said to have been armed with lathis came to the land in question.
1 Ram Asrey was standing at the Galiyara whereas deceased No.
4 and Sheo Prasad Accused No.
An attempt was also made to molest Smt.
2 was standing near the wall towards the West of the said Kothi.
They were requested number to use abusive language.
However, the said order was number companyplied with.
A 3 did number participate in the attack on any of the two deceased persons.
Abrasion 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on joint of right side knee.
The testimony of Smt.
He was in possession thereof but his right to make any companystruction thereupon was in dispute.
Mishri Lal and his companyvillagers asked him number to do so.
1 went to the roof top of a house.
1 Phool Chand died during pendency of the appeal in the High Court.
Shakuntala Devi but the same was number registered.
At that juncture, it is alleged that Accused Nos.
Other witnesses examined by the prosecution were the doctors who had companyducted post mortem examination on the body of the deceased Ram Asrey and Ram Harak as also examined the injuries on the body of 15 injured persons.
Before the police authorities, Phool Chand is said to have given an undertaking number to make any companystruction.
Multiple punctured wounds firearm wounds over the right side of neck in an area of 15 cm x 6 cm x muscle deep marks of 2 3 pellets in number which were towards the inner side.
Multiple firearm entry wounds on entero medival aspect of right hand in an area of 7 cm x cm sic , 7/1/2 cm above right side.
Accused No.
3, 4 and 5 asked Accused Nos.
Multiple firearm entry wounds in an area of 36 cm x 30 cm spread over chest and right side of abdomen and on chest and left side of abdomen.
A large number of villagers assembled at the place.
There was swelling on all four sides of this injury.
3 went to raise companystructions, they were armed with deadly weapons.
One of the persons, viz.,
His earlier attempt to raise companystructions on the said land had met with resistance by the villagers.
When the appellants together with Phool Chand and Accused No.
2 also fired shots.
The remaining injuries can be caused by pellets from the rifles of the three accused.
Amongst the villagers, Ram Asrey since deceased , his son Mishri Lal first informant , Hardev, Suraj Lal, Ram Singh, Ram Dass, Vishram, Ram Saran, Shiv Pal, Mohan Lal, Shiv Prasad, Umrao, Pyare, Ram Lakhan, Karam Ali and Ram Prasad were present.
Bone deep on the forehead 6 cm over the numbere bridge.
Mishri Lal and others also received firearm injuries.
Mishri Lal PW 1 , Suraj Lal PW 2 and Ram Saran PW 3 examined themselves as eye witnesses to the occurrence.
1 was a retired Army Officer.
Accused were requested number to make any companystruction till the disputes between them were determined by the companypetent companyrt.
He was holding a double barrel gun.
The following injuries were found on the body of the Mishri Lal Firearm wound 0.5 cm x 0.4 cm on left side neck 12 cm above left sterno clavicle joint.
They made a companyplaint to the officers of the Tehsil.
Only when they started raising companystructions, the deceased and the prosecution witnesses objected thereto.
Accused Nos.
Ram Asrey standing at the Galiyara received a gun shot injury.
1 and 2 to kill them or to assault them.
Phool Chand Accused No.
We may place on record that he had also intended to put up companystructions earlier but did number succeed.
3 to 5, viz.,
The accused persons did number listen to the said advice.
Deceased No.
17 persons received injuries.
Accused Nos.
Only at that time, with a view to save the modesty and honour of his sister as also save the life of other members of the family, they caused injuries to various persons.
Abrasion 0.2 cm x 0.2 cm on inner side on left foot 6 cm beneath the knee joint.
On 3.02.1978 at about 9 a.m., the said Phool Chand armed with a double barrel gun, his brother Kishan Chand Accused No.
Ram Harak who had also sustained gun shot injuries breathed his last in the hospital.
Upon protest having been lodged, all of them advanced towards him with a view to kill him.
The prosecution in support of its case examined 13 witnesses.
The defence story was disbelieved both by the learned Trial Judge as also the High Court.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
Shakuntala Devi, Sri Dutt, Ramfal and Gokul Chand.
As regards injuries on the body of Mishri Lal, Dr. Pandey opined Injury No.
1 of Mishri Lal can be caused by a pellet fired from rifle.
They came to the companyclusion that all the five accused were present at the place of occurrence and participated therein and used their respective weapons to inflict injuries upon the victims in execution of their companymon object and for the said purpose they had formed an unlawful assembly.
Multiple firearm entry wounds in an area of 11 cm x 8 cm towards the front side of right forearm 7 cm below the elbow.
Multiple firearm entry wounds in an area of 9 cm x 6/1/2 cm on the backside of the palm of right hand,7 cm below from the wrist joint.
The injuries on the deceased, therefore, must have been caused as a result of more than one shots fired at each of them.
