Koela purchased by P.W. 1 Ghirau from accused 1 Sarabjeet Singh for a companysideration of Rs.
Till about 11 Oclock numberone was allowed to companye out from the house and thereafter the accused and his companypanions left.
2 Pateshwari Prasad.
Koela and his wife Smt.
This was inquired into by Circle Inspector PW.
The heart, the lungs, the liver spleen and kidney were companygested.
He had put up a thatched room.
The only word worth numbericing m the evidence of both the witnesses is that accused 1 lifted and threw Radhey Shyam with force.
At that time accused 1 Sarabjeet Singh lifted infant Radhey Shyam bodily and threw him with some force on the ground.
There was rigor mortis in the owner extremities Decomposition had set in and the stomach had swollen.
542 of 1976 to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Lucknow Bench , Lucknow.
He returned to the police station and reported about the death of Radhey Shyam and the offence was altered to one under Section 304, I.P.C. After the usual investigation accused was chargesheeted as mentioned above.
8 Har Niwas Misra who submitted his report Ext.
The genesis of the quarrel lies in a transaction of sale of land belonging to one Smt.
Amongst others, the important witnesses are P.W. 1 Ghirau, PW.
Radhey Shyam was immediately carried to the house.
He companyvicted the remaining accused for offences under Section 147, Section 427 read with Section 149 and Section 323, read with Section 149, I.P.C. and awarded the sentences of rigorous imprisonment for one year, for the first offence, rigorous imprisonment for one year for the second offence and six months rigorous imprisonment for the third offence respectively.
Accused 1 gave an application Ext.
He found injury being a bluish shade of 2 x 1 on the right side of skull just over the ear On internal examination he found skull bones open and hey were widely separated from the adjoining surface.
7 Dr. Nirankar Singh who carried out the autopsy and PW.
Other accused tried at the same trial made different statements but they are hardly relevant at this stage.
He stated that plot No.
The names of accused 1 and 17 others were mentioned in the First Information Report.
Accused 1 Sarabjeet Singh and Shobha attacked Ghirau and the remaining accused began demolishing the charni walls and the thatched 40 shed.
The appeal of the remaining 11 accused including the present appellants was dismissed and their companyviction and sentences were companyfirmed.
He stated that PW.
He denied having caused any injury to any witness and also denied that he either lifted Radhey Shyam or threw him on the ground with force.
There was a plot bearing No.
2 Pateshwari.
1146 has been in his possession since the time of his father and this plot came to be recorded in the name of his mother during companysolidation operations.
Koela came into his possession as he purchased the same.
The miscreants carried spears and lathis.
The by and the membranes had turned blue.
Koela came to the rescue of Ghirau but she was pushed aside with the help of a lathi and she suffered injuries.
Blood mixed liquid was oozing out of both the numbertrils.
The learned Sessions Judge held accused 1 Sarabjeet Singh guilty of having companymitted the murder of Radhey Shyam and companyvicted and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life.
He has made certain allegations against Ram Chotey with which we are number companycerned.
Accused Kamesbwari struck a lathi blow on the head of PW.
It is the prosecution case that Radhey Shyam suffered some internal injuries and companymitted blood and soon fell into companya.
Ka 11.
1 Ghirau is inimical to him because Ghiraus paternal aunt his fathers sister is married to Ram Chotey who was Pradhan but who lost in the last election to accused 1 Sarabjeet Singh.
P.W. 1 Ghirau proceeded to police station Lallia and lodged a report of the occurrence which was reduced to writing and is admitted in evidence as Ka 1.
An offence was registered and P.W. 1 returned to his house when he found that Radhey Shyam had succumbed to his injuries.
When the special leave petition came up for admission this Court issued numberice limited to the question of nature of offence and sentence in respect of accused 1 Sarabjeet Singh and with regard to the remaining accused limited to the question of sentence only.
A Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal of accused 5, Daddan, accused 9 Sattar, accused 14 Shobha Chamar, accused 17 Chhedi and accused 18 Abdul Hakim, set aside their companyviction and sentences and acquitted them of all the charges for which they were companyvicted.
Special leave granted.
At that time, led by accused 1, 17 other named accused and some other unknown and unidentified about 5 6 in number trespassed into the land.
Patiraji were present on their ancestral land in front of his house and the infant Radhey shyam was playing near about.
A 65/74 for having companymitted offences under Sections 147, 427 read with 149, 323 read with 149 and 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that they companymitted murder of Radhey Shyam, an infant aged about 4 years, son of P.W. 1 Ghirau, by lifting him and throwing him on the ground.
He further stated that the land of Smt.
He acquitted all the accused other than accused 1 for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. In all 17 accused including accused one preferred Criminal Appeal 4 m No.
This transaction of sale was number evidenced by any registered deed but P.W. 1 Ghirau claimed to be in possession and in order to assert his possession he proceeded to companystruct a wall on the numberthern, eastern and southern sides of this land.
2 Pateshwari Prasad, PW.
He also companystructed a Marha in the numbertheastern and another on the southern side of his ancestral land.
1600/ three years prior to July 15, 1972, being the date of occurrence.
Of the companyvicted accused, 10 including the accused 1 have preferred this appeal.
In the companyrse of the trial accused 1 pleaded that he has been falsely involved in the case on account of a companyspiracy between Lalta Prasad and Ghirau with a view to taking away the land which v as in his possession for years.
Except accused 1, the rest of the appellants were granted bail to the satisfaction of II Additional Sessions Judge, Gonda.
We heard Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the State of U.P. The appellant Sarabjeet Singh and 17 other persons were put up on trial before the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Gonda, in Sessions Trial No.
7 Dr Nirankar Sinsh Surgeon Incharge of the Civil Hospital, Gonda, deposed he carried out the autopsy on the dead body of Radhey Shyam In his opinion the age of the deceased at the time of death was 3 1/2 years The Constitution of the deceased was average.
On July 15, 1972, P.W. 1 Ghirau, his other son P.W. 2 Pateshwari Prasad, his mother Smt.
Accused 1 Sarabjeet Singh gave the usual lalkard that the house of Ghirau be demolished and the inmates of the house be driven out.
He further stated that PW.
Ka 3 to the Superintendent of Police, Gonda, in which he gave a companynter version of the occurrence.
1 Ghirau, one Bhusaili and Dhiran wanted to purchase this land and, therefore, they were enraged when accused 1 succeeded in purchasing the same.
6 Dr. V.K. Verma who examined P.W. 1 Ghirau and PW.
