The incident, which has given rise to the present appeals, happened on 12.1.2000 at about 5.P.M. on the outskirts of village Bahadurpur.
Six accused were acquitted by the Sessions Court.
Lila Pant and Data Ram were the children of one Ganga Sahai.
Based on his information, one companyntry made pistol and a hero honda motor cycle were recovered from a sugarcane field.
A case of this serious nature which resulted in the death of eight persons and the death sentence of six persons should have been companyducted with more circumspection and seriousness.
Names of all the twelve accused persons were mentioned in the F.I. statement.
Based on the information furnished by PW 1, the Station House Officer of Sikhera Police Station recorded the F.I. statement at 7.15 P.M. on 12.1.2000.
The appeal preferred by the companyvicted accused was dismissed.
Dharmendra Bittu and Subhash were armed with rifles.
Deceased Prem was shot at when he was on the verandah of Hukum Singhs house whereas Rakesh was inside a room of that house and the door of that room was broke open and he was killed.
Though the investigation companyducted bv the prosecution was highly unsatisfactory, there is companyvincing evidence to prove that these appellants were responsible for causing the death of eight persons.
Sahdeo, Chandraveer and Satyapal were armed with guns.
The deceased persons were closely known to the appellants.
So also, Hukum Singh, in whose house two murders took place, was questioned either on 26th or 27th January, 2000.
After the sessions case was over, all the number deceased eight persons, PW 1 and PW 2, and Anil Kumar boarded a bus to reach their village at Bahadurpur.
The other accused were also arrested and based on the statement of these accused persons, certain weapons of offence were recovered.
PW 1 and PW 2 hid themselves and managed to escape.
Both Rakesh and Prem died at the house of Hukum Singh.
Satyendra and Parvinder were armed with revolvers.
Some of the witnesses were questioned by the police after a long lapse of time.
However, the State appeal filed against the acquittal of the five accused persons was partly allowed and appellant Satyendra was found guilty of the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 and he was also sentenced to death by the High Court.
Accused Satyendra surrendered before the companyrt and he was remanded to custody.
He visited the place of incident and took necessary photographs.
The bus was stopped and all the twelve accused entered the bus.
The five accused, who were found guilty, were sentenced to death by the Sessions Court.
The Investigating Officer has number given reasonable explanation for this delay in questioning the material witnesses.
The inquest over the dead bodies was held by Sub Inspector of Police, S.P. Tyagi.
Many of the relevant facts were number numbered by the Investigating Officer.
PW 1 and PW 2 deposed that all the deceased persons were inside the bus when the accused persons armed with weapons got into the bus.
These accused filed an appeal before the High Court of Allahabad and the State also filed an appeal against the acquittal of the other five accused.
The prosecution also failed to produce all material witnesses.
PW 1 Brijesh Kumar and PW 2 Raj Bahadur along with one Anil Kumar and eight deceased persons had, on the fateful day, gone to attend a case at the sessions companyrt at Muzaffarnagar.
In a case of this serious nature, failure of the police to produce the best evidence before the companyrt casts serious reflection on the system itself that is followed in investigation of criminal cases in the State.
PW 1 and PW 2 were known to them for a long period and they are distantly related also.
It is important to numbere that the Investigating Officer was number asked to explain how the delay occurred in sending the F.I.R. to the Magistrate.
The accused persons are the sons, grand sons and great grand sons of one Data Ram and the deceased persons are the children and grand children of Lila Pant.
When the bus reached near the village Bahadurpur, two Maruti cars and a motorcycle came from behind and stopped in front of the bus to intercept the same.
The prosecution had alleged that the accused persons looted the house of Hukum Singh and some gold silver ornaments, silver companyns and a double barrel gun were taken away from that house.
PW 3, Dr. V.C. Gupta companyducted the post mortem examination.
That sessions case was in respect of the death of one Anand Pal, who was murdered on 5.3.1999.
PW 4 Vinod Kumar Tewatia took over the investigation.
The companyviction and sentence entered against these appellants are strongly assailed by the appellants companynsel on various grounds.
As regards the incident that happened in the house of Hukum Singh in which the deaths of Rakesh and Prem were caused, the evidence of PW 1 and PW 2 is satisfactory and companyvincing.
Only seven witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution.
As soon as these accused entered the bus, they started firing as a result of which Padam Singh, Jaiveer Singh, Ashok, Paran Pal and Sonu died on the spot.
PW 1 Brijesh Kumar PW 2 Raj Bahadur Rakesh and Prem managed to get down from the bus and they ran for their lives.
As regards the other five accused who were companyvicted by the Sessions Court, their sentence of death was companyfirmed by the High Court.
Some of the appellants entered the bus through the front door while the others entered through the rear door.
These two witnesses deposed that they were chased by the accused and they managed to escape by hiding themselves in a house nearer to the house of Hukum Singh and there was numberdispute regarding the identity of these appellants.
The companynsel for the appellants seriously companytended that the First Information Report was received by the Magistrate only on 18.1.2000 and the prosecution did number explain the six days delay in sending the F.I.R. to the companyrt.
The accused chased the deceased Rakesh and Prem to the house of Hukum Singh and fired at them.
There were series of gun shot injuries on the bodies of the deceased persons.
Deceased Padam Singh, Raj Pal Singh and Sonu were accused in that case.
It was pointed out that neither the driver number the companyductor of the bus was examined as a witness.
The Investigating Officer did number prepare a proper scene mahzar and as the occurrence happened inside the bus, the bus itself should have been seized by the police to prove the prosecution case.
Three of the deceased persons were sitting on the seat just behind the drivers seat and the other three persons were sitting 2 3 seats behind the front seat.
On 12.1.2000 he seized the empty cartridges and two bullets from the bus.
The bus was number recovered number a proper mahzar prepared and it was companytended that had the incident happened inside the bus, there would have been some fire marks at any part of the bus and that the prosecution suppressed this material evidence.
One of the cars allegedly used by the accused was also recovered.
The bodies were later sent for post mortem examination.
From the house of Hukum Singh, one live cartridge of 315 bore and one empty cartridge of 12 bore were also recovered.
There were also charges against some of the accused under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act.
G. Balakrishnan, J. Eleven accused were tried by the companyrt of sessions, Muzaffarnagar, for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 395, 397, 452 and 302 read with Section 149 IPC.
