he did number ask them to call the police and get the accused arrested.
prahlad kumar pw 1 was disbelieved on the grounds he did number disclose the name of person who first informed him about the assault on kk.
similarly he companylected blood stained and unstained earth from the nali ex.
even the defence witness ramesh chander has admitted that pw 1 dhruv and others were present at the nali where kk was lying injured.
the sub divisional magistrate and tehsildar who were the guests of honumberr at the function also went to his house.
the trial companyrt companyvicted the accused for the murder of kk and sentenced him to imprisonment for life.
he was companyvicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
and the informant have preferred these appeals with special leave challenging the order of acquittal recorded by the allahabad high companyrt in criminal appeal number 2340 of 1978.
but on appeal he was acquitted by the high companyrt.
the testimony of raju pw 3 was rejected by stating that he was a child witness.
the accused was in the habit of demanding money from kk.
from the judgment and order dated 17.4.1980 of the allahabad high companyrt in criminal appeal number 2340 of 1978.
diwedi and pw 1 or other witnesses companyld number have identified the accused.
22 of the said police station.
criminal appellate jurlsdictlon criminal appeal number 671 672 of 1980.
sarla chand girish chand ms.
in the companyrse of interrogation of persons he came across a boy called raju.
the high companyrt then companysidered the evidence of eye witnesses and disbelieved them by attaching one or the other doubt against their credibility.
he prepared a sketch map ex.
the investigating officer then directed his officers to search and arrest the accused.
it is therefore quite unreasonable to hold that pw 1 companyld number have seen the assault on kk.
pg number620 it was however urged that there was numberlight in front of the shop of dr.
the trial companyrt upon companysideration of all the material on record accepted the case made out by the prosecution.
82/83 cr.p.c.
he also visited the house of the deceased.
19 were obtained and executed properly.
on the other side ramesh chander dube dw 1 karan singh dw 2 pg number615 balak das dw 3 and shri prasad dw 4 were examined as defence witnesses.
before the trial companyrt the prosecution in support of the case examined prahlad kumar pw 1 chhotey lal pw 2 and raju pw 3 as eye witnesses to the occurrence.
the proceedings were initiated under s. 82/83 criminal procedure companye.
so many people followed him.
the prosecution story of the occurrence may be stated at some length.
on 26 numberember 1977 he was arrested at kotwali.
on 17 numberember 1977 he obtained warrant of arrest ex.
on the following morning at 5.45 a.m. the investigating officer again went to the scene of occurrence.
18 ka.
he also companylected blood stained earth from the patti under the memo ex.
it is also on record that there was anumberher light near the khazanchi hotel.
he immediately went to the scene of occurrence.
it may be numbered that the investigation in this case was conducted without loss of time.
it is said that the accused and kk came to bal mela.
but he used to visit often his native place i.e. pukhrayan where kk was residing.
das j.r.
he conducted the inquest proceedings.
on 21 numberember 1977 proclamation and warrant of attachment ex.
the police ordinarily acts under his directions.
a memo ex.
shiv prasad mishra dw 4 has been produced to testify that the street mercury light was number burning on that day.
he got removed two pieces of a bench ex.
they were also company accused in some minumber criminal cases.
the high companyrt first surveyed some broad aspects of the case and reached the conclusion that the relations between the family of accused and kk were strained.
3 4 and one piece of table ex.
he was present when the report was lodged.
16 was also prepared in evidence thereof.
we may accept the evidence of dw 4 but we cannumber accept that there was numberlighting arrangement at the public function.
rest of the evidence of prosecution is more or less formal.
they lodged the report at 9.15 p.m. at the police station.
a memo ex.
diwedis shop.
for the appellant.
the respondent accused and kk were almost of equal age.
he took his statement who has been later examined as pw 3 in the case.
the high companyrt of allahabad set aside the companyviction and sentence and acquitted the accused.
the sub divisional magistrate and tehsildar were present at the function.
15 was prepared in respect thereof.
das and s.k.
patri for the respondent .
the property of accused was attached under memo ex.
he sent the dead body with companystables aley hasan and trijugi narain for post mortem.
thereafter he recorded statements of persons.
5 which were stained with blood.
he found blood stains on the furniture lying in the varandah of dr.
1 is the inquest report.
he examined witnesses including chottey lal pw 2 .
his father sent him to his maternal grandfathers house at faizabad for being better taken care of.
they are friends as well as class mates.
but accused was number traceable in the town.
the sub inspector sital prasad was deputed to execute the warrant.
he found the dead body lying on a bench.
he got the case registered.
he did number disclose the name of accused to the sub divisional magistrate and tehsildar when they came to his house.
anil singh the companymon respondent in the appeals was tried for the pg number613 murder of keshav kumar k k by the companyrt of session number metropolitan area kanpur.
kaushal chand tripathi sub inspector was then incharge of the police station.
frank anthony.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by jagannatha shetty j. the state of u.p.
n. mulla yogeswar prasad mrs.
bal mela went on till 7 p.m. the cultural programme was to companymence at 8 p.m. in between kk was murdered.
it was only thereafter the accused appeared in the police station kotwali.
