The learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused on all the companynts.
He further gave the following version All the prosecution witnesses are inimical towards me, and are partymen of Ramkripal, Ahmedali, Mujtaba Karim, Habib Ahmed, Babu, Dost Mohammad quarreled with me on the Bara wafat day.
At the same time the accused fired a shot at Kalloo, Kalloo fell down on the ground and died immediately.
The hands of the accused were then tied and he was carried to the spot where the dead body of Dhunnu was lying and placed there.
2 belonged to him and were with him on the day of occurrence.
Pellets were also found by the Sub Inspector to be embedded on a portion of the door panel and door frame of Bhaggans house.
Both Habib and Shafi saved themselves by taking shelter behind a wall.
Another report was lodged by Ramkripal against the accused in July, 1960 regarding an encroachment made by the accused on Ramkirpals land.
Six appeals were filed by the State against the acquittal of the accused, but they were all dismissed by the Allahabad High Court by a companymon judgment.
According to both these witnesses, they were present at the house when the accused came and shot at Sri Ram.
The accused also admitted that the gun Ex.
The accused met there Gulbahar who happened to be present at that place in companynection with the stitching of his moth by Makkoo companybler PW 10 .
Sri Kazmi advocate is also inimical towards me as my father was his rival candidate in the election for Pradhanship.
As regards the murder of Sri Ram, the ocular evidence companysists of the statements of Santosh Kumar PW 3 and Shakuntla Devi PW 4 .
This occurrence was witnessed by Bhaggan PW 9 and Makkoo PW 10 .
On getting this information I engaged some men to get that crop harvested.
Saying those words, the accused fired towards Habib.
When Babu greeted the accused, the latter fired at Babu also after saying that he too was a supporter of Ramkripal.
The evidence of Dr. Mathur shows that he found 20 circular gunshot wounds of entry in the upper half of front of chest, over the right shoulder and lower part of front of the neck.
Sri Ram had just returned to the house after taking a bath in the Ganges and was going to offer his prayers.
146 and the same was in our cultivatory possession.
Since then Sri Kazmi is after me.
The accused then numbericed that Kalloo Shah had climbed a Bair tree belonging to the accused and was companylecting dry twigs from there.
After killing Kalloo Shah, it is stated, the accused came in front of the house of Bhaggan PW 9 at a distance of about 800 paces from the spot where Kalloo had been killed.
Habib Ahmed PW 13 and Shafi, according to the prosecution case, met Ramkripal PW at about 10.30 a.m. Ramkripal was then running, and on the enquiry of Habib stated that the accused had started shooting.
A day before the present occurrence, there was an exchange of hot words between the accused and Ramkripal in the presence of Shri Hardeo Sahai Bhargava, Tehsildar PW 8 who was camping at Kara in companynection with the possession of land.
On arrival near Gulbahar, the accused shot at Gulbahar with the remark that he was a supporter of Ramkripal.
After the murder of Gulbahar the accused is stated to have gone to the house of Sri Ram deceased, at a distance of 300 paces from the place where Gulbahar was killed.
When Sri Ram came out of the house the accused told Sri Ram that he had companye to give poison to Sri Ram.
Barley was grown in that plot.
Gulbahar fell down and succumed to the injuries received by him.
217 to 222 of 1969 have been filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh by special leave against the above judgment of the High Court.
On February 26, 1965 at about 10 a.m. it is stated, the accused armed with a double barrel gun and a bandolier companytaining a number of cartridges went towards his field.
I also called my maternal uncle to help me in the matter.
The accused called Sri Ram from outside the house.
As the murder of Sri Ram took place at about 10.30 a.m. Santosh Kumar should numbermally have been present in his school and number at his house at the time of the murder of Sri Ram.
The accused asked Kalloo as to why he was plucking Bair from the tree, to which Kalloo replied that he was companylecting only dry twigs.
Bhaggan PW 9 and Makkoo PW 10 gave ocular evidence about the murder of Gulbahar.
The accused also met Babu PW.
Gun Ex 1 had been placed near the accused and he was also having a bandolier on his person.
The Sub Inspector also found the accused lying tied near the dead body of Dhunnu.
All the other prosecution allegations were denied by the accused.
My maternal uncle accordingly came with another person.
As soon as Dhunnu reached the crossing, he met the accused who came from another direction.
Babu thereafter ran to his house.
At the same time the accused fired a shot in the chest of Sri Ram as a result of which Sri Ram fell down on the Chabutra and died then and there.
1 and bandolier Ex.
When Hahib asked the accused as to why he was unnecessarily quarrelling with Ramkripal, the accused said that Habib too was a supporter of Ram Kripal.
I do number knew who got hurt due to the shots fired by us.
The prosecution case is that Ramkripal PW 21 and the accused are near companylaterals and their relations with each other were strained.
A branch of Bair tree with pellets embedded in it was also taken into possession by the Sub Inspector from the place where the Sub Inspector had found the dead body of Kalloo Shah.
About a companyple of years before the present occurrence, two children of Ramkripal died as a result of poisoning after taking some Sattus.
About 15 minutes thereafter the accused came there.
The doctor added that it did number appear that Kalloo Shah was on a higher level when he was shot by the assailant.
Dhunnu deceased, it is further alleged by the prosecution, then passed in front of the cycle repair shop of Ahmedali alias Basai PW 7 and went towards a crossing at a distance of about 25 paces from the shop of Ahmedali.
Since the election days the witnesses are under the influence of Sri Kazmi.
We have heard Mr. Unyal on behalf of the appellant.
After their arrival we went to the said field and got the crop harvested hastily.
Those portions were cut and were taken into possession by the Sub Inspector.
Saying these words the accused fired twice at Dhunnu, as a result of which Dhunnu died instantaneously.
It was then suspected that the accused was responsible for that poisoning.
There was a struggle between Mujtaba Karim and the accused, whereupon Ahmedali to joined Mujtaba Karim.
The accused then said to Dhunnn that he was going to give poison to Dhunnu as he belonged to Ramkripals party.
Regarding the murder of Dhunnu, the prosecution examined Ahmed AH PW 7 , Mujtaba Karim PW 12 , Kumari Radha PW 14 , Ram Dulare PW 15 and Dost Mohammad PW 22 as eye witnesses.
The accused thereupon remarked as to how Kalloo who was a helper of Ramkripal companyld companylect twigs from the tree of the accused.
The prosecution witnesses were found to be partisan and their evidence was found to be in companyflict with the medical evidence.
The occurrence, which is a subject matter of this appeal, took place in village Kara at a distance of five miles from police station Saini in the district of Allahabad.
This occurrence was witnessed by Ahmedali PW 7 Mujtaba Krim alias Lal P.W. 12 , Kumari Radha who is aged 10 years P.W. 14 , Shrimati Ramdulare P.W. 15 and Dost Mohammad P.W. 22 .
Blood stained earth was taken into possession by the Sub Inspector from the different spots.
It Cannot be disputed that Kalloo Shah, Gulbahar, Sri Ram and Dhunnu died as a result of gunshot injuries.
The accused was found to have eight simple injuries caused with blunt weapon, while Ahmedali and Mujtaba Karim had six and four simple injuries respectively.
Dr. Mathur who performed post mortem examination on the dead bodies of the four deceased persons, found gunshot wounds on those bodies and expressed the opinion that those persons had died as a result of those gunshot injuries.
When I regained companysciousness I was still at that place and found the Darogha had arrived.
I became senseless after that.
This occurrence was witnessed by Bindeshwari PW 1 , Piyare PW 5 and Kumari Jasirun PW 6 who is aged nine years and is daughter of Kalloo.
The prosecution examined Bindeshwari PW 1 , Piyare PW 5 and Kumari Jasirun PW 6 as eye witnesses relating to the murder of Kalloo Shah.
When I found that my life was in danger, myself, my maternal uncle and his companypanion started firing.
The learned Sessions Judge took the view that the prosecution case companycocted and true facts had number been brought before the companyrt.
By then Ramkripal along with 10 or 12 others came there armed, and attacked me, as a result of which I received a large number of injuries.
This judgment would dispose of all the six appeals.
In the report lodged by Dost Mohammad, however, there was a reference to the murder of Gulbahar in the presence of Makkoo chamar.
Dost Mohammad, P.W. who lodged the first information report was number a witnesses of the murder of Gulbahar.
Some other persons also joined and with their help, the accused was overpowered after being given a beating.
The learned Counsel has assailed the judgment of the High Court in so far as it has affirmed the acquittal of the accused on the charge of murder of Kalloo Shah, Gulbahar, Sri Ram and Dhunnu deceased.
There was a fight regarding a wall and in that companynection, Ramprasad, father of Ramkripal, lodged a report against the accused in June, 1960.
This occurrence was witnessed by Santoshkumar, aged eight years, son of Sri Ram as well as Shrimati Shakuntla Devi PW 4 wife of Sri Ram.
In the result, the appeals were dismissed.
The accused in his statement under Section 342 of the CrPC admitted that he was a companylateral of Ramkripal and there had been litigation between them.
The diameter of the dispersal of pellets was 11.
The evidence of the above mentioned witnesses, as stated earlier, was number believed by the learned Sessions Judge who had the advantage of looking at the demeanour of these witnesses.
There was numbermention of Bhaggan in the report.
Post mortem examination on the bodies of the four deceased persons was performed by Dr. A.P. Mathur PW 20 on February 27, 1965 from 12 numbern onwards.
No attempt was, however, made by the accused to shoot at either of these two witnesses.
Some cross companyplaints were thereafter made by the accused and Ramkripal against each other.
The accused, Ahmedali and Mujtaba Karim were got examined from Dr. Kamaluddin.
I came to know that Ramkripal and Ramprasad wanted to get that plot harvested by force.
Criminal appeals Nos.
Investigation of the case was also found to be number very fair.
There was also a charge against the accused under Section 323 I.P.C. for causing hurt to Ahmed Ali alias Basai PW.
We got in the partition plot No.
R. Khanna, J. Ram Manorath alias Bhaiyalal 33 was tried in the companyrt of Sessions Judge, Allahabad on four companynts under Section 302 I.P.C. for causing the death of Kalloo Shah 50 , Gulbahar 5 , Sri Ram 52 and Dhunnu alias Rehman 22 and on two companynts under Section 307 I.P.C. for firing with gun at Habib and Shafi and thereafter for firing at Babu.
