PW 8/A. It appear below the statement of Babu Ram, which is marked as Ex.
Another reason given by the High Court for discarding their evidence is that they were appearing as witnesses and supporting each other in numerous criminal cases.
PW 8/B shows that it was recorded at about 5.35 p.m. It refers to D.D. entry No.
Om Prakash held Padam Singh from behind and the other two accused, namely, Thakur Singh and Lala Ram inflicted injuries on the front and back of Padam Singh with daggers.
That report was also produced and marked Ex.
It also lead other supporting and companyroborative evidence.
Babu Ram, father of Padam Singh, who was following Padam Sing, saw this incident and raised cries for saving his son and catching the accused.
DW 2A , which has been heavily relied upon by the High Court for doubting the companyrectness of the entries made in the FIR regarding time and names of the accused.
The prosecution examined Babu Ram PW 3 , Pyare Lal PW 4 , Prabhu Dayal PW 6 and Sua Lal PW 7 as eye witnesses.
4 of Than Singh Nagar, falling within Anand Parbat Police Post, situated at a distance of about 2.5 Kms.
116/84 was filed by companyvicted accused Las Ram and Om Prakash.
The three accused were tried and companyvicted for the offence of murder, by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.
The learned companynsel for the respondents accused tried to support the findings recorded by the High Court on the same grounds as are given by the High Court.
All these pieces of evidence clearly establish that all the details regarding the incident has reached the police station by about 5.30 p.m. We Therefore, hold that there was numberdelay in recording the FIR and that it was truly recorded.
Thakur Singh was caught while running away by Pyare Lal and Sua Lal.
Meanwhile the police party headed by sub inspector Dharam Pal, which was on patrolling duty, reached that spot and came to know about the incident.
Prabhu Dayal was a witness in one case filed by the mother of Babu Ram.
The prosecution case was that a few days prior to the date of the incident, wherein Padam Singh lost his life, a quarrel had taken place between Padam Singh and the accused.
PW 3/A. The report companytains the names of the accused and the witnesses and also the substance of the information received by him.
The said entry refers to the writing in Hindi, prepared by Sub inspector Dharam Pal on the basis of the statement made by Babu Ram.
It is number number in dispute that the incident took place at about 4.15 p.m. in Gali No.
On these allegations all the three accused were tried for companymitting the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
131/84 was filed by accused Thakur Singh.
As an intimation was received form an officer in charge of a police post, that fact was numbered in the daily diary.
Prabhu Dayal ran after Om Prakash and caught him.
But the father and brother of Padam Singh intervened and pacified them.
The High Court rejected the evidence of eye witnesses on the ground that injury No.8, companyld number have been caused if the deceased was held by accused Om Prakash in the manner stated by them.
The statement of Babu Ram also companytained all those details.
The three accused who were caught by that time were handed over to the police.
Hearing his cries many people, including Prabhu Dayal, Pyare Lal, Sua Lal and others, came there.
This report was dispatched at 5.00 p.m. as stated in the report itself.
Babu Ram himself was able to catch hold of accused Lala Ram.
Scribed by ASI DO The High Court, after referring to this entry and the evidence of Jai Pal Singh PW 8 , held that what was sent by I.Dharam Pal PW 15 was only an intimation to register an offence and as names of accused, witnesses were number known till than the formal FIR was numberprepared at that time.
Aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused Babu Ram, father of the deceased and a prosecution witness, has filed these appeals after obtaining special leave.
PW 14/A , which also show that by 1.30 a.m. the blood stained cloths of accused Om Prakash, Lala Ram and Thakur Singh were already deposited in the malkhana.
Criminal Appeal No.
Criminal Appeal No.
7, Than Singh Nagar, Anand Parbat New Delhi has been received at the police station for registering a case punishable u s 302/34 IPC through Const.
16A Ex.
52/82.
On 19.2.1982 at about 4.15 p.m. when Padam Singh was passing through Gali No.4, the three accused caught him and told him that he was saved earlier by his father and brother but they would number leave him on that day.
The said entry was proved by Head Constable Om Prakash DW 2 , and reads as under Copy of report No.
That case was filed against as many as 73 persons.
The trial companyrt rejected the companytention of the accused that there was delay in recording the FIR and that the delay was because till the next day morning names of the assailants were number known.
The High Court also failed to take into companysideration the extracts produced from the register of malkhana maintained at Patel Nagar Police Station Ex.
From this evidence it was number proper to record a finding that es Babu Ram, Pyare Lal and Prabhu Dayal were often appearing as witnesses in criminal cases and were supporting each other.
16/A dated 19.2.82 of the roznamcha maintained at Police Station Patel Nagar.
It is also in evidence that the letter of request written by sub inspector Dharam Pal to the C.M.O. Police Hospital for companyducting post mortem on the dead body of Padam Singh was received in the hospital at night.
from Patel Nagar Police Station.
