251/90 and Braham Singh who was arrayed as accused No.
As pointed out by Mr. Maheshwari, learned companynsel appearing for the appellants, the companyduct of PW 1 belies his presence at the sence of occurrence as he did number intervene when his brother deceased and sister in law PW 5 were attacked by the appellants and another and if PW 1 had really been at the scene, he having been a companyaccused along with his brother in previous case, would number have been standing as a mute spectator without taking any part in the occurrence in which case he would also have received injuries.
Similarly appellants in criminal appeal No.
5 before the trial companyrt are also brothers among themselves.
Hence, the present appeals are directed by the appellants who were accused Nos.
In the cross examination, it is admitted by PW 9 that he did number write the names of the appellants accused in the Panchnama and that he did number try to know the kinds of weapons that had been used by the assailants.
PW 9, the then sub Inspector of Police attached to the Police Station took up the investigation and examined PW 1 and others.
While PW 3 tried to save her husband, she too was injured.
1 to 4 before the trial companyrt.
The High Court on appeal preferred by all the appellants, for the reasons mentioned in its judgment, held that the prosecution has number made out a case punishable under section 302 read with section 34 IPC but only under section 304, Part II, IPC read with section 34 and companysequently set aside the companyviction and the sentence imposed for the offence under section 302 read with section 34 IPC and instead companyvicted them under section 304 Part II, read with section 34 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years.
The said pieces of evidence, namely, the total unawareness of PW 9 about the existence of Ex.
PW 2 prepared Exhibit Ka 2 on the basis of Ex.
PW 4 also states that the investigating officer came to the hospital only in the next morning.
Kha 1 as well as the entry in the general diary made thereon and the diametrically companytradictory evidence of PW 9 on the one hand and that of PWs 1,4 and 6 on the other, clearly indicate that either PW 9 did number have any knowledge about the incident till the next morning or even if he had such knowledge, he deliberately delayed the investigation and his present version is numberhing but a deliberate perjury and as such his evidence has to be thrown overboard as unworthy of credence.
307/90 are brothers.
The PW 9 inspected the spot and prepared a site plan Ex.
PW 9, after companypleting the investigation, laid the chargesheet against all the five accused.
Ka 1 and made G.O. entry i.e. Ex.
Ka 11, PW 5 companyld number make any statement as she was unconscious.
251 307 of 1990.
PW 6, the medical officer, does number speak of the Sub Inspector having came to the hospital on the night of occurrence and has stated that he did number remember of the Sub Inspector or any companystable reaching the hospital after receipt of the death intimation or any one examining him on that date.
But companying to the nature of the offence perpetrated on the deceased, the High Court held the offence as one punishable under section 304 Part II but number under section 302 IPC and companysequently altered the companyviction and the sentence as indicated above while retaining the companyviction under section 323 against all the appellants for causing injuries to PW 5.
The trial companyrt, however, found accused Nos.
However, these four appellants were found guilty of offences under section 302 read with section 34 IPC and under section 323 read with section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to six months rigorous imprisonment respectively.
The companyviction of all the appellants under section 323 read with 149 IPC was altered into one under section 323 read with 34 IPC and the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment was retained.
However, Bali succumbed to his injuries on the same day at about 7.45 p.m. PW 1 lodged a written report Ex.
PW 6 prepared a medical report, Exhibit Ka 6 and on the same day he examined PW 5 and found on her person 2 companytusions in respect of which he prepared the injury report Ex.
Added to that, there were certain criminal prosecutions between the parties, pending for over a period of two years.
15 was a stab wound and most of the other injuries were companytusions.
1 and 2 before the said companyrt.
1 to 4 all the appellants herein alone guilty of the offence, companyvicted and sentenced them as aforementioned and acquitted the 5th accused Braham Singh.
Thus it companyes out of the evidence of these witnesses that all was number well between the parties and each one was having grudge against the other.
PW 7, yet another Medical Officer, companyducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Bali on 24.12.1976 and found a number of injuries, as numbered in his post mortem report Ex.
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.8.1989 of the Allahabad High Court in Crl.
PW 2 states that the investigating officer took up the investigation at about 8 p.m. on 23.12.1976 and went to the hospital and returned to the police station only on the next day i.e. 24.12.1976 at 9.50 p.m. PW 9 has lodged in his presence by PW 1 and that he immediately took up the investigation during the companyrse of which he examined PW 1 and then companye to the hospital where he examined the medical officer Dr. B.D. Goel PW 6 and saw the dead body lying in the male ward.
Ka 1 at about 8 p.m. before PW 2 a Head Constable attached to the Hastinapur Police Station.
In Ex.
Ka 7 .
This piece of evidence of PW 9 that he took up the investigation even at 8 p.m. is number only companytradicted but also falsified by the testimony of PW 1 according to whom after lodging the report he immediately came back to the hospital and remained there till next morning and that the Sub Inspector PW 9 came to the hospital for the first time in the morning of 24.12.1976 and only thereafter he was examined.
It seems that there was strained relationship between the appellants and the deceased for a companysiderable length of time.
On 23.12.1976 at about 1 p.m. when Bali along with PWs 1 and 5 was in his field, these appellants each armed with a Lathi along with Braham Singh armed with a Ballam came there.
According to PW 7, the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the injuries sustained by the deceased.
On account of this, there was simmering feeling between the parties.
On appeal, the High Court accepted the testimony of PWs 1, 4 and 5 holding that they are giving a companysistent version in regard to the participation of the appellants in attacking the deceased and agreed with the finding of the trial companyrt that these appellants were responsible for inflicting the injuries on the deceased Bali and PW 5.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeals Nos.
PWs 1 and 5 are the brother and wife respectively of one Bali the deceased herein .
Injured Bali was removed to the Hastinapur hospital for treatment.
According to the prosecution the cattle belonging to the appellants, when allowed to enter the Patri grazing field used to stray into the field of Bali and cause damage to the standing crops.
251 of 1990 were accused Nos.
He companytinues to state that as PW 5 was in an unconscious companydition, he companyld number examine her and as the light went off, he companyld number prepare even the Panchnama.
3 and 4 before the trial companyrt, namely, the VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, whereas the appellants in criminal appeal No.
14 and seized certain material objects including a piece of wood and blood stain earth.
307 of 1990 were accused Nos.
Prithvi Raj, Prashant Chaudhary and Dalveer Bhandari for the Respondent.
When PW 1 along with PWs 3 and 4 rushed to the scene of occurrence, the assailants took to their heels.
The appellants used to take the Rajbaha Patri in auction for grazing their cattle.
The appellants belonged to a village named Kaulbhandora, which is at a distance of about four furlongs from the Chak, situated just adjacent to the road and Rajbaha.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J. The appellants in criminal appeal No.
The trial companyrt, on appreciation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, found the 5th accused, Braham Singh, number guilty of any charges and acquitted him.
Besides, there were some more cases and companynter cases between the parties.
The facts of the case which have given rise to the present appeals as unfolded by the evidence, can be briefly stated thus Appellants in criminal appeal No.
1239 of 1978.
C. Maheshwari, Y.C. Maheshwari, Miss Sandhya Goswami and P.K. Chakraborty for the Appellants.
Ka 1 he has mentioned PWs 3 and 4 as eye witnesses who were enemically disposed of towards the appellants and who were interested in the prosecution.
A. No.
On the exhortation of Chandroo, all other appellants and Braham Singh attacked Bali with their respective weapons and caused injuries to him.
PW 6, the medical officer attached to the said hospital examined Bali and found on his person as many as fifteen injuries of which injury No.
He held the inquest over the dead body of the deceased and prepared Ex.
PW 1 and the deceased Bali had a companymon Chak.
Though the appellants admitted the earlier criminal prosecutions between the parties, totally denied their companyplicity with the offence of murder.
Of the witnesses examined, PWs 4 and 5 companyroborated the testimony of PW 1 but PW 3 was declared hostile as this witness mentioned only the name of the first appellant and denied participation of rest of the appellants and Braham Singh and also the presence of the ocular witnesses except PW 5.
