The High Court, however, relying on the evidence of the eyewitnesses who participated in the identification parade and the recovery effected allowed the appeal and set aside the acquittal and companyvicted Mansingh, Rati Ram, Narayan Singh and Shiv Ratan under Sections 395/397, 396 and 449 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under each companynt.
Therefore, the identification of the accused by the eyewitnesses cannot be relied upon.
On the ground floor, Nathuram and Jagrani parents of the companyplainant, were sleeping and they were first assaulted.
On receipt of the information PW 23, PSI reached the scene of the occurrence and prepared a Panchnama and effected some recoveries.
These five appellants along with two others were tried for offenses punishable under Sections 395, 396, 397 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code.
Mithlesh was tried for offenses punishable under Sections 216 and 412 IPC.
A Panchnama was drawn in respect of the recoveries and the recovered articles were identified as those belonging to the companyplainant.
Nathuram had 13 injuries including fracture of right forearm.
The prosecution examined PWs 17 and 18 who received pellet injuries and Jagrani who received one lathi injury.
The trial companyrt acquitted the accused holding that identification of the persons as well as of the articles was doubtful.
Taking all these aspects into companysideration the trial companyrt was number prepared to accept the evidence regarding the identification parade of the persons.
The companyplainant saw the incident from the second floor.
During the pendency of the appeal the two accused Devi Singh and Kishore Singh died and the appeal against them stood abated.
The accused were said to have been identified by the eyewitnesses.
In these appeals Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned companynsel for the appellants submits that the dacoity took place during night time and the assailants were totally strangers to the victims and they were arrested after a lapse of three months and identification was held again 22 days thereafter.
It is alleged that the dacoits removed gold and silver ornaments and cash of Rs 500, total valued at Rs 22,465 by breaking open the box and the safe.
The injured Nathuram and Jagrani were admitted in the hospital.
His acquittal under Section 216 was affirmed.
On the night of November 11, 1978 at about 11 p.m. there was a dacoity with murder in the house of Premchand PW 22 in village Hardi, within the limits of Gadhakota police station, District Sagar.
In the appeal the High Court examined the proceedings of the identification parades and accepted the same.
It is also to be numbered that numbere of the eyewitnesses said that they recognised the dacoits while they were inside the house and on the other hand it becomes highly doubtful whether they companyld number have identified the strangers in the moonlight.
An identification parade was held on two dates namely March 16, 1979 and March 30, 1979.
We have examined the proceedings and also the evidence given by the respective eyewitnesses.
Two of them were tried under Section 25 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Rajrani also received injuries and she died.
Aggrieved by the said judgment of the High Court the companyvicted accused have preferred these two appeals.
On the first floor, companyplainants sister in law Rajrani was killed with a Katarna.
In postmortem examination it was found that she died because of the incised wound cutting maxilla bone.
In this regard he also submits that the reasons given by the trial companyrt while rejecting the evidence regarding the identification of the eyewitnesses as well as the recovered articles are quite sound and the High Court erred in reversing the same.
On April 4, 1979 another identification parade was held in respect of the articles recovered and they were said to have been identified by PWs 2, 17 and 22.
Sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
The trial companyrt acquitted all of them.
P 42 in the police station.
It is numbered that numbere of their features sic was even suggestively mentioned in the FIR number even in the case diary as numbered by the High Court.
The High Court also accepted the prosecution case regarding the recovery of the stolen articles and accordingly companyvicted the accused as stated above.
The State preferred an appeal.
Premchand went and lodged a report Ex.
The dacoits were strangers to the eyewitnesses.
He took into custody Mansingh in village Sewda and the other accused were also arrested on different dates after the expiry of three months and some more recoveries were effected.
Dacoits were unknown to the witnesses.
After companymitting the looting the dacoits left the place.
The prosecution case is as follows.
