After the criminal law was set in motion, the investigation was companyducted by S.I. Rajveer Singh, PW 8, who after recording the statements of some of the witnesses under Section 161 CrPC between 6 a.m. to 8 a.m. on the next day, prepared the panchanama and the sketch map of the spot and companylected blood stained and unstained earth as well as two cartridges.
Dhani Ram was arrested by S.I. V.P. Saxena at Meerut on 19.04.1979.
1019 of 1981 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has companyfirmed the judgment and order passed by the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in Sessions Trial No.
All of them reached near the said tube well about 7.30 p.m. when they heard the sound of a gun fire from inside the kotha shed of the said tube well.
A report of the occurrence was prepared by Devendra Singh with the assistance of Charan Singh, PW 1, and was filed at Police Station Kharkhauda.
As the prosecution story further unfurls, sometime prior to the occurrence, Gaje Singh, brother of the accused, Dharam Pal, was murdered and Charan Singh, PW 1, along with others had faced trial for his murder and eventually got acquitted.
The present two appeals have been preferred by the two appellants who are aggrieved by the affirmation of the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence by the High Court.
On 29.03.1979, the investigation was transferred to S.I. V.P. Saxena and he came to learn on 11.04.1979 that all the accused persons except Dhani Ram had surrendered before the Court and had been sent to custody.
The occurrence leading to the murder of Badan Pal took place in the evening hours of 26.03.1979.
Filtering the unnecessary details, the facts which are necessary to be adumbrated for the adjudication of the instant appeals are that there was enmity between the accused, Dharam Pal and his family on the one side and Charan Singh, PW 1, on the other.
On the date of occurrence, he was at the aforesaid tube well.
Charan Singh, PW 1, Gajpal, PW 2, Tedha, PW 3 and Nepal Singh belong to village Dastoi, to which the deceased, Badan Pal, the nephew of Charan Singh as well as the accused persons belong.
The accused persons abjured their guilt and intended to face trial.
As far as the other three accused persons, namely, Dharam Pal, Mahendra and Vijendra, were companycerned, the High Court companycurred with the view expressed by the trial companyrt and resultantly dismissed their appeal.
Dhani Ram and Dharam Pal carried pistols, Vijendra was armed with a ballam and Mahendra carried a lathi.
After they reached the place, they found Badan Pal lying dead with bleeding wounds.
On seeing them, they took to their heels.
Gajpal, PW 2, and Nepal Singh in the fateful evening while carrying the meals for Badan Pal, on their way, met Tedha, PW 3, who wanted to irrigate his fields from the aforesaid tube well.
The prosecution in order to bring home the charges examined 11 witnesses and marked certain documents as exhibits.
These were sealed on the spot and the dead body was sent for postmortem.
After the matter was companymitted to the Court of Session, charges were framed under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC against the accused persons on 10.01.1980.
Badan Pal was a student and he used to stay overnight at his tube well which had a shed in the jungle of village Sarva.
They reached the place without loss of any time and numbericed that all the four accused, namely, Dhani Ram, Dharam Pal, Mahendra and Vijendra, came out of that kotha.
The aforesaid witnesses identified the accused persons in the light of the electric bulb fixed on the roof of the tube well as well as in the torch light.
Dipak Misra, J. Present appeals, by special leave, call in question the defensibility of the judgment of companyviction and the order of sentence dated 13.05.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No.
Defence chose number to adduce any evidence.
Eventually after companycluding the investigation, charge sheet was laid against the accused persons before the companycerned Magistrate.
