After Swami Din fired shot with the gun, and at the same time Ram Gopal fired shot with the pistol.
He was also carrying with him a piece of new cloth, NARIAL companyonut , wheat and PRASAD and that, on his shoulder he was carrying a rifle and a belt of cartridges.
and accused 3 were the subject mater of Confirmation Reference No.
Mannu Lal P.W. 1 carried Uma Shanker home on the quilt but on the way he breathed his last.
1 Sughar Singh was inserted, Thirdly, the actual time when the affidavit was sworn in as mentioned in the affidavit itself shows some alteration made therein it appears that at first 1.30 p.m. was written in the affidavit but later on the figure 1 was changed to figure 7 in a clever manner which alteration becomes clear if the figure 7.30 p.m. is viewed with the help of a magnifying glass.
634 of 1973 against their companyvictions and sentences while he.
Ram Narain and Sohan Lal were behind us.
In the first place, he has pointed out that the writ petition, to support which the affidavit was said to have been sworn was presented before the High Court on July 9, 1971, which was again withdrawn or taken back from the High Court on July 9, 1971 itself and there was numbersuch urgency as to have the affidavit sworn by the accused No.
Several Katha articles as well as the clothes of Uma Shanker were taken charge of and statements of Mannu Lal P.W. 1 and other witnesses like Munni Lal P.W. 6 , Ganga Prasad P.W. 9 .
As a result of the bleeding injuries, the clothes of Uma Shanker got stained with blood and the blood had also fallen on the ground.
sic used to practise the profession of Purohit in villages Karmer, Bambori and surrounding villages.
July 5, 1971 at about 2.30 p.m. in village Karmer.
My son Uma Shanker and I after having recited Katha at the place of Jagdish Lobar blacksmith of my village were companying.
It appears that there was professional rivalry between Uma Shanker and Mannu Lal on the one hand and Ham Gopal A 3 on the other and for quite some time prior to the incident in question which took place on July 5, 1971, the villagers of Karmer had stopped engaging the services of Ram Gopal A 3 for purohiti work and entrusted the same to decease Urna Shanker and his father Mannu Lal P.W. 1 and therefore, Ram Gopal A 3 started bearing grudge and ill will to wards Uma Shanker and Mannu Lal.
1 but later on, it appears, that the name of Jamuna das was struck out and the name of accused No.
13 that had been caused near the umbilicus companyld have been caused from a distant of more than six its and companyld have beep caused by two shots, Now beyond giving approximate distance from which the shots were fired by accused Nos.
1 to 13.
Kha 3.
The inmates of the house gathered as also several other persons from the village.
1 before the Oath Commissioner, Shri Tandon in the office of Shri Dwivedi, Advocate, long after the office hours at 7.30 p.m. on July 5, 1971.
Uma Shanker was going ahead and I was behind him.
On that day deceased Uma Shanker and his father Mannu Lal P.W. 1 had gone to one Jagdish Lobar for reciting Satya Narain Katha at his place.
634 of 1973, acquitting respondents 1 to 5 in respect of the offences said to have been companymitted by them under Sections 147, 148, 379, 302 and 302 read with 149 of the I.P.C. The prosecution case as revealed toy the evidence led at, the trial may briefly be stated as follows The deceased Uma Shanker and his father Mannu Lal P.W. 1 as also all the five respondent accused have been the residents of village Karmar, P.S. Oral.
In support at his plea of alibi, accused Sughar Singh examined two witnesses, namely, Shri Dharam Pal Singh, Advocate D.W. 1 and Shri S.K. Tandem, Advocate D.W. 2 , an Oath Commissioner working in the Allahabad High Court.
According to him, on the day of occurrence he was number in the village but had gone to Allahabad in companynection with the filing of a writ petition of his uncle Jamuna Dass with regard to the suspension of latters gun licence and had himself sworn an affidavit before the Oath Commissioner at about 7.30 p. m. in the evening on that day in support of the writ petition.
Mannu Lal P.W. 1 then went to Oral after walking a distance of about seven miles from his village Karmer.
The scalp was intact.
All these eye witnesses, except Rameshwar P.W. 12 who was declared hostile, fully supported the prosecution case and narrated the entire occurrence in terms of the prosecution case as indicated above.
l and Man Singh original accused No.
After Uma Shanker fell down, Man Singh A 4 removed the rifle of Uma Shanker from his shoulder Dashrath Singh A 5 snatched the belt of cartridges and thereafter all the accused ran away.
25 of 1973 The appeal preferred by the accused was allowed by the High Court and ail of them were acquitted and the Confirmation Reference was rejected.
In his opinion the death was due to shock and haemorrhage resulting from the above injuries.
1 to 6 companyld have been caused by one fire only and from a distance of 3 ft.
Rameshwar P.W. 12 , Raghubar P.W. 13 and Dhani Ram P.W. 14 were recorded and, a Panchnama of the scene of offence was also made and blood stained earth was taken charge of.
In particular, Sughar Singh A l put forward a plea of alibi.
His explanation was that the register was number with him and he had submitted the same for checking in the Administrative Section in the Allahabad High Court but when the above register was summoned from the High Court it was reported that such register had never been submitted by Shri Tandon in the Administrative Section for checking purposes.
Others were formal witnesses, including the Panchas and the Constables who had merely helped the investigating Officer during the investigation.
1 on the day of occurrence at 7.30 p.m. at Allahabad.
It further appears that there were two parties in the neighbouring village Bamhori.,
From the Baithak of Raghubar, which was nearby, a quilt was brought and Uma Shanker was kept on that quilt and with the help of witnesses.
The Chemical Analysers Report as well as the report of the Serologist were produced and proved as Exhibits Ka 34 and Ka 35 respectively.
There was a distance of 7 8 paces in between him and me.
Doctor S.D.S. Chauhan, Medical Officer Incharge of the Sadar Hospital, Orai performed the postmortem on the dead body of Uma Shanker during the companyrse of which he numbericed as many as 13 injuries some entry wounds and some exit wounds , all ante mortem and having been received by fire arm.
Fourthly, apart from the document Exh.
The affidavit said to have been so sworn by accused No.
Secondly, the affidavit itself produced at Exh.
7 to 9 were exit wounds companyresponding to injuries Nos.
The deceased Uma Shanker, his father Mannu Lal P.W. 1 and respondent accused Ram Gopal original accused No.
1 to 3 and further stating that during the firing the deceased had turned and Dhani Ram stating that the first shot fired by accused No.
At that time, according to the prosecution, all the respondents accused were lying in ambush, and Man Singh A 4 and Dashrath Singh A 5 suddenly appeared on the road from the temple side and exhorted the other accused to kill Uma Shanker by shouting brothers, the enemy has companye, kill him, where upon Sughar Singh A 1 Swami Din A 3 and Ram Gopal A 3 sic the former two having a gun each and the third one having a pistol.
1 to 6, The other inlet in jury was number 13 while injuries Nos.
But in this case astonishingly enough Shri Tandon had number made any entry pertaining to the affidavit in question in his register and in fact, he companyld number produce his register.
All these shots struck Uma Shanker, as a result of which he fell down with bleeding injuries at that very place.
Kha 3, which companytains alterations, the most important piece of evidence which companyld have clinched the matter was the record which is required to be maintained by the Oath Commissioner pertaining to the several affidavits which were sworn before him but the Oath Commr.
He prepared inquest Panchnama of dead body Exh.
The State of U.P. has companye up in appeal to this Court by special leave that was granted by this Court on August 22, 1977.
13, he companyld number definitely say to what they related and of what metal they were.
Shri Tandon, Advocate, was number able to produce the register which was required to be maintained by him companytaining the entry relating to the swearing in of this particular affidavit.
However, he found the testimony of two eye witnesses, namely, Mannu Lal P.W. 1 and Dhani Ram P.W. 14.
Out of six eye witnesses, Rameshwar P.W. 12 was declared hostile by the prosecution itself the names of Munni Lal P.W. 6 and Raghubar P.W. 13 were number mentioned as witnesses in the First Information Report while Ganga Prasad P.W. 9 was found to have scant respect for truth, and, therefore, the learned trial Judge discarded the testimony of these four witnesses.
The accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.
1 on that day has been produced at Exh.
Gopal A l, A 2 and A 3 aimed their weapons at these persons and threatened them that if any one came near he would be shot.
An offence under Section 395/396, I.P.C. was registered and the requisite investigation was undertaken by Inspector, Beni Ram Govil, Incharge of Kotwali Orai who visited village Karmer in the night.
1 and number in the name of accused No.
Besides the above injuries, the Medical Officer also numbericed that there was a companymunited fracture on the right humerus as also a companymunited fracture on the hip bone under injury Nos.
but he again asserted that the injuries caused to right arm were possible to have been caused by more than one fire similarly, the inlet injury No.
Sughar Singh emerged from the east and fired a shot from his gun, which hit Uma Shanker and immediately thereafter Swami Din as well as Ram Gopal, who had emerged from the West, fired a shot each from their respective weapons.
According to him the first six injuries were gun 6hot wounds on the right arm, being inlet wounds the margins were inverted and blackened.
As regards metal pieces, that were recovered from injury No.
After the function of reciting the Katha at Jagdish Labors place was over both were returning home Uma Shanker, who was carrying a Jholi cloth bag companytaining Sankh Conch Jhalar, Danda, Idol of Thakurjee with Singhasan, Katha book, Coconut, Prasad etc.
The learned Sessions Judge has pointed out several suspicious circumstances which throw companysiderable doubt on the point whether the said affidavit had really been sworn or number by accused No.
According to the prosecution this incident was seen by Ram Narain, Sohan Lal, Ganga Prasad, Munni Lal, Raghubar and Dhani Ram, apart from Mannu Lal P.W. 1 .
He first went to his son Lallus place and dictated the report of incident to Lallu and after going to the Oral Police Station he lodged that written report F.I.R. Exhibit.
as reliable and since the same was companyroborated by the First Information Report, in which number merely the names of all the accused had been disclosed but also the part played by each of them had been disclosed, as also by the medical evidence, he accepted the same in proof of the prosecution version.
All these persons challenged and questioned the respondents accused as to what they had done but Sughar Singh, Swami Din and Ram.
It may be stated that respondents Sughar Singh original accused No.
and also a riffle and belt of cartridges on his shoulder, was walking ahead white Mannu Lal was walking 7or 8 paces behind him while they were proceeding from North to South by a lane, at about 2.30 p.m, .Uma Shanker, who was walking ahead, reached a spot near Matan ki Mathis a temple .
He companyvicted Man Singh A 4 and Dashrath Singh A 5 under Section 302 read with Section 149 and sentenced them to life imprisonment each of them was also companyvicted under Section 147 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year each one of them was also companyvicted under Section 379 for having removed the rifle and belt of cartridges respectively from Uma Shanker and sentenced to further rigorous imprisonment for two years each, the substantive sentences being directed to run companycurrently.
The incident giving rise to the prosecution of the resporidents accused occurred on.
11 and 12.
Certain possibilities in the alternative were also elicited from him in his cross examination, for, he first stated that injuries Nos.
He also stated that three wad companyers were recovered from the right arm and three metal pieces were also recovered from the hip bone.
After receiving the Chemical Analysers report and the report of the Serologist and after companypleting the investigation, Inspector Beni Ram submitted a charge sheet against the accused on 24 7 1971.
In his opinion, the cause of death was shock and haemorchage on account of the above injuries.
Ka 1 at about 7.15 p. m. whereafter he returned to Karmer.
Ka 26.
Sughar Singh accused from towards the east fired shot with the gun at Uma Shanker, which hit Uma Shanker.
Injuries Nos.
The various steps taken during the investigation were deposed to by Inspector Beni Ram Govil P.W. 17 .
25 of 1978 and Criminal Appeal No.
Shri Tandon then stated that in the absence of the above register he made an entry pertaining to the affidavit in question on loose papers and that even those loose papers had been misplaced.My son was carrying SANKH, JHALAR and a DANDA for ringing the bell ghanta companytained in a bag.
1 examined two witnesses, namely, Shri Dharam Pal Singh, Advocate D.W. 1 and Shri S.K. Tandon Advocate, Oath Commissioner D.W. 2 .
D. Tulzapurkar, J. This appeal by special leave has, been preferred by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the judgment and order of the Allahabad High Court dated October 3i, 1973, in Confirmation Reference No.
Kha 3, which was to be sworn was first prepared in the name of Jamuna das, the uncle of accused No.
At the trial in support of its case the prosecution, examined in all 17 witnesses, out of whom six were material witnesses being eye witnesses to the occurrence, namely, Mannu Lal P.W. 1 , the companyplainant and the father of the deceased, Munni Lal P.W. 6 , Ganga Prasad P.W. 9 , Rameshwar P.W. 12 , Raghubar P.W. 13 and Dhani Ram P.W. 14 .
In cross examination it was elicited from him that numbercomplete pellet was recovered from injuries Nos.
He also recovered three pieces of wad from the right arm and three pieces of metal from the right hip bone.
After holding inquiry, Shri R.P. Singh, A.D.M. J companymitted the respondents accused to the Court of Session on 15 12 1971 to stand their trial for offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with 149 and 379, I.P.C. To the charges that were framed against them in the Sessions Court, all the accused pleaded innocence and companytended that they had been falsely implicated in the case on account of enmity.
He was also carrying the book of Katha Moorty idol of Thakurjee together with the Singhasan.
10 to 12 were exit wounds companyresponding to this injury.
one of MotiLal and the other of Om sic the sic to the party of MotiLal while the deceased Uma Shanker to the party of Om Prakash.
He, therefore, companyvicted Sughar Singh A l , Swarni Din A 2 and Ram Gopal A 3 under Section 302 for the murder of Uma Shanker and sentenced each to death each of them was also companyvicted for rioting under Section 148 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years.
death sentences on accused 1, accused 2.
Medical evidence regarding the injuries on the deceased was furnished by Dr. S.D.S. Chauhan P.W. 10 , who produced and proved, his post mortem report at Exh.
When Uma Shanker reached near Maten ki Mathia then accused Man Singh and Dashrath Singh challenged saying, The enemy has companye, kill him.
