P.C. of the appellant was recorded in which he stated that due to prior enmity he has been falsely implicated in the case.
The appellant along with other persons ran away from the spot.
On appeal, the High Court by its impugned judgment and order dated 21.8.2008 in Criminal Appeal No.
The police having companypleted the investigation, filed charge sheet against the appellant.
The prosecution in order to establish its case against the appellant and another altogether examined 5 witnesses PW 1 to PW 5 .
In this appeal, Shri M.N. Rao, learned senior companynsel appearing on behalf of the appellant did number challenge, number make any submission as regards the companyviction of the appellant under Section 436 IPC.
500/ .
355 of 1989 of the charge of having companymitted the offences punishable under Sections 436 and 147 IPC.
1529/91 dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant.
The occurrence giving rise to the present appeal is said to have occurred on 26.2.1989 at about 1.00 P.M. The case of the prosecution, as deposed to by the companyplainant Sita Ram PW 3 is that he was living along with his wife and children in a hut near Nagla Shiv Temple, P.S. Lalkuan for the last three years preceding the date of occurrence.
He was tried by First Upper Sessions Judge, Nainital in S.T. No.
His submission was companyfined only to the sentence imposed upon the appellant by the companyrts below.
It is alleged that the appellant along with his brother in law and uncle came to the place where the companyplainant was residing and started beating him and thereafter set fire to the hut.
In order to live in peace and tranquility the appellant and Malti Devi entered into a companypromise at the intervention of local elders whereunder an amount of Rs.
On account of companymission of offence of mischief by fire the entire hut along with the household articles were burnt and reduced into ashes.
It is brought to our numberice that during the pendency of the appeal in the High Court companyplainant Sitaram died in the year 2005.
In this appeal by special leave the appellant Amar Nath Shukla had challenged his companyviction under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code hereinafter referred to as IPC .
SUDERSHAN REDDY,J. Leave granted.
The statement under Section 313 Cr.
It is the further case of the prosecution that Sitaram reported the details of the incident vide Exhibit KA 1 on the same day at about 16.00 P.M Based on Exhibit KA I the Police Station Lalkuan, District Nainital registered a case under Sections 436 and 323 IPC against the appellant.
775 of 2001 Old No.
The trial companyrt by its judgment and order dated 29.7.1991 found the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 436 IPC and acquitted him of the charge under Section 147 IPC.
1 lakh was given by the appellant to the widow as a solatium.
That because of initiation of criminal case against the appellant there were some ill feelings between the appellant and the widow of the companyplainant Malti Devi aged 61 years.
