The appellants pursued him, but were in heir turn pursued by Constable Sheikh Israil, P.W 4 and other persons who had seen the incident.
The appellants preferred an appeal to the High Court which was heard along with companynected Reference No.
The version of Suresh Chandra was that Rama Nand incited the others to attack Moti whereupon all the other four i.e. Babu Ram, Bhagelu, Jharkhande and Dahari stabbed Moti with knives.
Ka 5 lodged by Suresh Chandra the case has been exaggerated, for number only the present appellants have been named as culprits but also two more persons viz.,
They all said that Bhagelu caught hold of Motis hair, Jharkhande seized his arm and Dahari stabbed him in the abdomen.
150 of 1967.
2584 of 1966 along with companynected Reference No.
Moti had companylapsed and fallen down about 100 paces to the numberth of the place where Bhagelu had been arrested.
It said that P.W.4, Sheikh Israil was number mentioned in was the first information report by Suresh Chandra, P. W. 5.
On the companytrary he accepted the version given by Abdul Rahman P.W.1 , Marachhu Rai P.W.2 , Shambhu P.W.3 , and companystable Sheikh Israil P.W.4 .
Chandrika Rai P.W.6 , Prasad P.W.7 , Ram Surat Rai P.W.9 and Suresh Chandra P.W.5 himself, were examined.
On the way Motis companydition deteriorated, and Suresh Chandra took him to the hospital where Moti expired.
The other appellants, Bhagelu Rai and Jharkhande Rai were companyvicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
On the basis of their evidence, the Sessions Judge companyvicted.
In addition, companystable Ram Asrey P.W.8 companyroborated the story these eye witnesses with regard to the arrest of Bhagclu.
Rama Nand Rai and Babu Ram Rao were named.
The Sessions Judge did number believe these witnesses.
In support of this appeal Mr. Kohli argued, in the first place, that the High Court should number have accepted the evidence of companystable Sheikh Israil P. W. 4 as true.
The High Court by its judgment dated 3rd August, .1967 dismissed the appeal and maintained the companyvictions and sentences imposed on the appellants.
The companystable managed to capture Bhagelu and handed him over to another companystable Ram Asrey Shukul, P.W. 8, while he himself went to see what had happened to Moti.
Dahari Rai under Section 302, I.P.C. for the murder of Moti and sentenced him to death.
150 of 1966.
Thereafter Suresh Chandra went to the Doharighat Police Station and lodged the first information report, which was recorded at 7.00 p.m. In the first information report Ex.
In support of the version given in the first information report, four, witnesses, viz.,
The case of the prosecution was that on the5th October, 1965, the three appellants and the victim Moti had all gone to the Ramlila fair at Doharighat that at about 5.30 p.m., the appellants launched an attack on Moti, in the companyrse of which Bhagelu caught hold of his hair, While Jharkhande seized his arm and Dahari struck him in the abdomen with a knife.
The High Court also accepted the reference and companyfirmed the death sentence imposed on Dahari Rai.
His brother Suresh Chandra, P.W. 5, arrived on the scene at this time and companystable Sheikh Israil asked him to take Moti to the police station and from there to the hospital.
Ramaswami, J. This appeal by certificate is brought from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 3rd August, 1967 in Criminal Appeal No.
This omission does number appear to be important for P.W. 4 was examined by the investigating officer on the same day i.e. 26th October, 1965.
4 with regard to the identity of the appellants and the particulars of the crime companymitted by them.
