PW 3, son of the deceased, went and lodged a report in the Police Station Churkhi, six miles away on the same day at about 6.45 p.m. The case was registered and the investigation was taken up.
The trial companyrt companyvicted all of them and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and also various other terms of imprisonment for other offences.
Jagdev Singh A 1, Sahdev Singh A 2 and Kalloo A 4 gave axe blows and Surendra Pal Singh A 7 beat the deceased with iron rod.
On hearing the alarm, Vishwanath Singh PW 3, son of the deceased and several other persons came there and challenged the accused appellants but they did number care.
The accused however denied the occurrence and further stated that the deceased had association with dacoits and that he was also quarrelsome and was involved in a number of cases.
After companypletion of the investigation, the charge sheet was laid.
Since it was Saturday he left the school early at about 3.45 p.m. He was inside his house along with his mother and sister and the door of the house was open.
He also witnessed when the accused cut the head of Mohan Lal and carried it and he and other witnesses followed them and that the accused left the trunk at the Khaliyan of Jagram Singh and went towards south along with severed head of Mohan Lal.
Questioning the same, these three appeals at filed by the 10 companyvicted accused.
Smt Siyawati PW 4, niece of the deceased and his brothers wife tried to intervene and they also received injuries.
Mata Prasad A 9 and Ram Nath A 10 fired gunshots at the head of the deceased.
PW 2 is the son of companyplainant and grandson of the deceased.
They also took the defence that the head belonged to some young person and he trunk also was number of Mohan Lai and after recovery of these two parts of body belonging to the two different persons the police have foisted the case against them.
There the trunk was left and the head was taken away.
On September 15, 1980 the severed head of the deceased was recovered from the water in a river on pointing out by Inder Singh A 6 and the same was also sent for postmortem.
They tied the feet of Mohan Lai and dragged him up to the house of one Durga Singh.
He supported the prosecution case from beginning to the end and gave report to the police at the earliest.
He is a boy aged 12 years and he was a student of 8th class.
13, 14 and 15 of 1982 and the High Court dismissed all of them.
On September 13, 1980 at about 4 p.m. while the deceased was sitting at the door of Garikhana, all the accused came there armed with guns, axes and iron rods.
The companyvicted accused preferred Criminal Appeal Nos.
The learned trial Judge relying on the evidence of the eyewitnesses PWs 3 and 4 and also on the evidence of PW 2, medical evidence and other circumstances companyvicted all the 10 accused.
The trunk of the deceased was sent for postmortem after inquest.
The prosecution case is as follows.
The High Court once again companysidered the evidence of the material witnesses in great detail and agreed with the findings of the trial companyrt and companyfirmed the companyvictions and sentences passed against the appellants.
PW 3 is the companyplainant.
All the witnesses belong to the same village and they live in the vicinity.
There Mata Prasad A 9 and Ram Nath A 10 fired gunshots at the head of the deceased and Ram Babu A 8 and Roop Singh A 3 severed the head of the deceased and pierced it to an iron rod and lifted it up and thereafter the accused persons carried the trunk and the severed head of the deceased up to the Khaliyan of one Jag Ram Singh.
Another doctor, PW 6 examined Smt Siyawati PW 4 and on her, he found two companytusions.
PW 4 is the daughter of the brother of the deceased.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. All these three appeals arise out of the same judgment of Allahabad High Court.
If they have number given a companyrect estimate of time that would be attributable only to their lack of sense of time.
Shivnath Singh, A 5 exhorted others to catch hold of the deceased and kill him.
On this some of the accused caught hold of Mohan Lal and Ram Nath A 10, Jagdev Singh A 1 and Roop Singh A 3 entered into the house of the deceased and took away his rifle after breaking open the door.
The appellants are all interrelate and belong to one family.
Before the trial companyrt 10 accused were tried for offences punishable under Sections 148, 302, 451, 323/149, 302/149 and 201/149 IPC for companymitting the murder of one Mohan Lal with guns, axes and iron rod and for severing his bead and taking it away with intention to screen themselves from legal punishment and for breaking over the house of the deceased and taking away his rifle.
There was a faction between the party of the accused and that of the deceased.
The doctor, who companyducted the postmortem on the trunk and the head of the deceased found pellet injuries and opined that the trunk and the head belong to the same person.
