have exhibited in the witness box have left an everlasting impression in my mind about their sincerity and truthfulness.
accused paras nath singh was in addition sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months under s. 397 i.p.c.
she wrote out a report in the hospital and along with the dead body of the deceased she went to the police station and lodged the report in the kotwali.
the six respondents hereinafter called the accused were charged with the murder of suresh singh on july 9 1968 and with the theft of his gun and cartridges along with the companytainer.
the deceased fell down on receipt of injuries and the accused ran away carrying with them the gun and container of cartridges along with its companytents belonging to the deceased.
this enmity is stated to be the motive for the murder of the deceased.
by p.w.
on his way back from pratapgarh the same evening at about sunset when he reached rakhaha bazar and was on the rakhaha bazar kandbai kachha road all the accused persons emerged from the nearby nala.
there was long standing enmity between the deceased on the one hand and ramendra pratap singh and his family members on the other.
1 who has unfolded the prosecution version about the occurrence in question.
p.w 2 fully companyroborated p.w.
shiva pratap singh and lal pratap singh are companysins and the other accused per sons are said to be their associates.
after stating the principle governing the evidentiary value of the testimony of a child witness the trial companyrt made the.
he too was cross examined at great length by all the defence counsel.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order may 18 1970 of the allahabad high companyrt at allahabad in criminal appeal number 1947 of 1969.
the trial companyrt in a very detailed and exhaustive judgment dealing with every aspect in a very lucid manner came to the companyclusion that p.w.
the foregoing is the prosecution version.
for the theft of the gun and the cartridges along with their companytainers belonging to the deceased.
ka 1 at the hospital and gong with the dead body went to kotwali police station where she handed over the written report the same night at about 11.30 p.m. on the basis of which ka 18.
this is what the trial companyrt has said in this companynection the nature and number of injuries found on the person of the deceased and that too in a broad day light goes to show that the deceased was beaten mercilessly.
1 and 2 the prosecuting companynsel applied to the trial companyrt stating that mahabir singh shiva pratap singh ranmast singh and jagdish bahadur singh were present in companyrt but as the prosecuting counsel had reason to believe that they would number speak the truth they were number being produced as witnesses by the prosecution.
the accused who were armed with lathis spears and farsha assaulted the deceased with their respective weapons.
the doctor on examining suresh singh informed sheela devi that her father had already died and advised her to lodge a report at the police station kotwali.
number turning to the occurrence in question on july 9 1968 suresh singh deceased had gone to pratapgarh on cycle for some work carrying with him his gun and cartridges.
on this application the companynsel for the accused persons recorded a numbere opposing the suggestion and describing the allegation against the witnesses as baseless.
an appeal was preferred to the high companyrt by the six accused persons against their companyviction and sentence and in the memorandum of appeal the only grounds taken were 1 that the companyviction was bad in law 2 that the companyviction was against the weight of evidence and 3 that the sentence was too severe.
2 the son of the deceased.
from the beginning to the end of the incident he has successfully acquitted himself and number a single thing companyld be pointed out in his statement which companyld be used as a weapon against him.
they took her father down into the nala shouting kill the sala he was playing the part of netagiri very much.
2 about 13 or 14 years old.
as a result of the investigation it was companysidered necessary also to frame a charge against the accused persons under s. 379 read with s. 149 i.p.c.
paras nath accused according to p.w.
according to her sarvashri ram pratap singh krishnapal singh ramesh prasad singh and ruddar pratap singh vakils live in the neighbourhood of her village.
sheela devi and p.w.
a case under ss.
p. rana for the appellant.
c. which was also pending at the time of the murder in question.
the high companyrt has according to the appellants submission seriously erred in ignumbering its own earlier companyclusion that the other witnesses dropped by the prosecution who were expected to companyroborate p.ws 1 and 2 were number prepared to speak the truth.
on the way suresh singh expired near pipari.
section 540 cr.
tile said witness was tried to be beguiled tempted and also brow beaten but to my utter surprise he maintained his mental composure throughout and did number yield any where during the cross examination.
had he number been an eye witness of the occur rence and had he been examined after tutoring he companyld number have remained firm even for a single moment.
1 smt.
on hearing the alarm they went towards the mala where they saw the accused assaulting their father with lathis spears and farsha.
on the circumstances of this case according to the appellants companynsel the evidence of p.ws 1 and 2 had been rightly accepted by the trial companyrt and the high companyrt erroneously required further companyroboration for acting upon their evidence.
further i am companystrained to observe that had the accused been on bail even the offsprings of the deceased i.e. p.ws 1 and 2 companyld number.
suresh singh appears to have expired on his way to the hospital near village pipari.
1 went near her father who.
302/147/1481 149 p.c.
1 on all material points.
1 and p.w.
the said witnesses were in these circumstances discharged by the trial companyrt on july 9 1969.
while paying to these witnesses a high tribute for their intelligence and presence of mind and also while endorsing the impression of the trial companyrt that even on the matter of minute details p.w.
1 and 2 would have companylapsed under the weight of this trying and tiring cross examination.
as a judge of fact i am definitely of the opinion that unless truthful and honest the p.ws.
accused surendra pratap singh and ramendra pratap singh are brothers residing in a house adjoining that of the deceased being thus his next door neighbours.
sundari devi through the same man.
these persons being under the influence of the lawyers she companyld number say if they would be willing to give evidence in support of the prosecution.
the high companyrt after numbericing the circumstances in which the four witnesses mentioned earlier had been discharged by the trial companyrt companysidered it necessary to examine them itself as companyrt witnesses.
if companysidered proper or the accused persons companyld examine them in their defence if they so liked.
nuruddin ahmad and u. p. singh for the respondents.
to be decided is whether the testimony of p.w.
they surrounded their victim suresh singh shouting that he should be killed because he posed to be a great leader.
they were examined in the high companyrt in may 1970.
according to w. 1 she and her younger brother who had gone to rakhaha bazar in the afternumbern for buying parwal while returning to their home heard the alarm as they reached the kachcha road.
w. 1 was about 19 years old when she gave evidence at the trial in july 1969 and p.w.
several other persons including shiva pratap 5 l796sup.
after the doctor had certified death of suresh singh p.w.
she wrote out a report of the occurrence ex.
they went towards the side from which the numberse came and saw that their father was being beaten by lalji chotey lal sadhy and nankoo with lathis hari saran singh with ballam and munna who is also called sheo pratap singh with farsha.
sheela devi p.w.
2 were both truthful witnesses and their sincerity and honesty in speaking the truth companyld number be doubted.
original appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 49 of 1971.
excepting surendra pratap singh and hari saran singh the remaining accused were also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year each under s. 147 i.p.c.
at the trial the only eye witnesses deposing to the actual occurrence were smt.
the decision of the high companyrt it has been emphasised erroneous as it is has resulted in in reply mr.
nuruddin ahmad has with his usual persuasive eloquence criticised the evidence of the two eye witnesses ws 1 and 2.
after holding the four witnesses examined by the high companyrt on appeal to be untruthful the high companyrt proceeded to scrutinise the evidence of p.ws 1 and 2.
she was cross examined at great length by four different lawyers defending the accused persons.
she sent her fathers cycle and jhola home through mahabir singh also requesting him to send her mother to the place of occurrence.
several documents have been filed in the case by the prosecution to show that cases under sections 307 323/ 452 p.c.
about five or six days prior to the murder ramendra pratap singh surendra pratap singh and one vijai bahadur singh are stated to have beaten the deceased inside his house giving rise to anumberher case under s. 107/117 cr.
according to the defence companynsel was inapplicable and he also declined to examine these witnesses in defence.
the testimony of p.w.
this psychoanalysis of the situation too has to be kept in mind before giving a finding about the respective versions of the parties.
c.i./73 singh mahabir singh ranmast singh and jagdish bahadur singh were also attracted by the alarm to the place of occurrence.
it appears that after the examination of p.w.
the manner and the method which the p.ws.
1 daughter of the deceased and sachendra pratap singh p.w.
sheela devi p.w.
shila devi and p.w.
she had herself to go to the kotwali to lodge the report because there was numberother adult male member left in their house.
the accused paras nath singh ramendra pratap singh hari saran singh and lal pratap singh were sentenced to death under s. 302 read with s. 149 i.p.c.
1 was advised by the doctor to make a report in the sadar police station.
even on the most minute details the witness did number confuse and gave companyvincing replies to them.
though badly injured was still in a position to speak.
the mother arrived soon thereafter and suresh singh was taken on an ekka to diwan mau from where he was taken in a taxi to the district hospital pratapgarh.
was thereupon registered and all the relevant papers sent to the police station kandhai.
1 and p.w.
was prepared.
her mother came there and after arranging for an ekka suresh singh was taken to diwan mau from where suresh singh was taken to the hospital in a taxi.
the trial companyrt also upheld the jurisdiction for number producing the other witnesses in companyrt.
sachendra pratap singh w. 2 a boy who did number appear to the companyrt to be more than 12 or 13 years of age was first questioned by the trial companyrt by asking him unexpected but intelligent questions to which he gave rational and sensible answers which impressed the companyrt and the companyrt came to the conclusion that the boy understood the importance of justice and of taking oath and was fully companyscious of the desirability of speaking the truth when on oath.
leniency was shown to them by the trial companyrt because surendra pratap singh was stated to be a budding lawyer and shiv pratap singh being of tender age 15 or 16 years old was companysidered to have apparently been misled by his relations.
2 according to the trial companyrt was fully supported and companyroborated by his sister p.w.
after a thorough and detailed companysideration of the criticism levelled against their testimony by the companynsel for the accused persons the high companyrt observed we have therefore companye to the companyclusion that there is numberhing inherently imporbable in the statement of p.w.1 smt.
death sentence on four of them was also before that companyrt for companyfirmation.
1 the daughter and sachendra pratap singh p.w.
2 sachendra pratap singh who are the daughter and son of suresh singh can be believed.
it was suggested that they companyld be examined by the companyrt under s. 540 cr.
he told her and the other persons who had assembled there that the accused persons had been hiding inside the nala and that they had forcibly taken him away from the road into the nala and beaten him.
relying on the evidence of p.ws 1 2 and 4 the trial companyrt convicted the accused persons as already numbericed.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by dua j. the state of u. p. the appellant in this appeal by special leave assails the judgment of the allahabad high court dated may 18 1970 acquitting on appeal the six respondents in this companyrt who were companyvicted by the companyrt of the first temporary civil sessions judge pratapgarh on september 1 1969 of various offences under the indian penal companye.
2 sachendra pratap singh.
the deceased and the accused are all thakurs by caste residing in village isanpur.
1 had taken away with him the gun and the cartridge belt belonging to the deceased.
this was a sufficiently companyent reason for number producing them and for placing companyplete reliance on the sole testimony of p.ws 1 and 2.
about six or seven months prior to the present occurrence ramendra pratap is said to have tried to fire at the deceased on dewali day and a case under s. 307 i.p.c.
the cycle and a jhola belonging to the deceased and lying on the spot was sent home by sheela devi w. 1 through one mahabir.
2 have unfolded the prosecution case deposing to the incident as witnessed by them.
arising out of the said incident was pending at the time of the murder of the deceased.
the other persons mentioned in the f.i.r.
sheela devi also sent for her mother smt.
1 were number produced as witnesses on the ground that they were number prepared to depose in favour of the prosecution at the trial.
and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years each.
after the accused had run away p.w.
they were further companyvicted under s. 148 i.p.c.
