The High Court was number satisfied about the companyplicity of Charli Raja in the occurrence but there is overwhelming evidence so far as Lok Pal Singh is companycerned, inasmuch as he has been identified by P.Ws.
2, 3 and 6, saw the appellant Lok Pal Singh for a split of a second but these witnesses companyld easily recognise the accused.
Moreover, there was evidence that a torchlight was used by the appellant.
As regards the State appeal against acquittal of Charli Raja, the High Court felt that there was some doubt about his companyplicity in the affair.
It was number a case where it companyld be said that the witnesses, P.Ws.
Apart from this, P.W. 5, who as indicated before as the most companypetent witness and a full fledged eye witness narrated the entire story as seen by her.
It appears that according to the prosecution case the accused inspired by unholy spirit of revenge and retaliation entered the house of the deceased persons at 2.00 a.m. on 25.9.1981 and killed as many as six persons in the house and one in the field.
This was a most cruel and heinous murder and once the offence is proved then there can be numberother sentence except the death sentence that can be imposed.
It appears that the offence took a pretty longtime inasmuch as a number of acts were companymitted and as many as six persons were killed in the house in the companyrse of which the assailants went from room to room in order to make a detailed search for all their victims.
She has specifically named appellant Lok Pal Singh as one of the culprits.
The Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused except Lok Pal Singh and Charli Raja but the High Court while maintaining the companyviction and sentence of Lok Pal Singh, set aside the companyviction and sentence of Charli Raja.
Murtaza Fazal Ali, J. The appellant, Lok Pal Singh, has been companyvicted by the High Court Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. for murder of six persons which took place on 25th September, 1981 at about 2.00 a.m. The facts of the case have been narrated in the judgment of the High Court and Sessions Court and it is number necessary for us to repeat the same.
2, 3 and 6 by voice and as an eye witness by P.W. 5, who fully knew the accused appellant, Lok Pal Singh.
