It is the prosecution case that during the investigation respondents Bhanu Pratap, Bhola, Ramesh, Virender and Govind were identified by some of the prosecution witnesses.
178 of 1988.
According to her evidence she woke up and heard a loud shout raised by her grand mother.
The trial companyrt believed the prosecution evidence, except against accused Dinesh, and companyvicted the other accused.
Briefly stated the prosecution case was that during the night intervening 12/13.10.1977 the six respondents along with one Dinesh companymitted dacoity in the house of Dal Chand and in order to companymit dacoity caused injuries to Manohari Devi, Bimla Devi, Dayavanti, Pradeep, Sandeep, Anita, Dal Chand, Darshani Devi and Surji Devi, out of whom as many six injured, namely, Manohari Devi, Bimla Devi, Dayavanti, Pradeep, Sandeep and Anita lost their lives after some time.
PW 2, Parvati Devi was sleeping along with her grand mother Manohari Devi in one of the rooms on the ground floor on the western side of companyrtyard.
177 OF 1988 J U D G M E N T Nanavati, J. Both these appeals, one by the State and the other by the original informant Shambhu Dayal, are filed against the judgment and order passed by the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
In order to prove its case the prosecution examined five eye witnesses PW 2 to PW 6 and also led evidence regarding recovery of stolen articles.
What is number left to be companysidered is whether the evidence regarding identification of the accused and recoveries is so reliable that companyviction of the accused ought to have been upheld by the High Court.
PW 3 was sleeping along with his wife Darshani Devi on the first floor of the house in a separate room.
Other dacoits were having boxes in their hands.
As they were sentenced to death, a reference was also made to the High Court for companyfirming the death sentence.
It is also the prosecution case that respondent Subhash, Bhanu Pratap and Ramesh were found in possession of stolen articles, which were discovered at their instance.
It, therefore, allowed the appeal filed by the accused and acquitted all of them.
Aggrieved by their acquittal State has filed Criminal Appeal No.
All the companyvicted accused challenged their companyviction by filling an appeal.
Respondent Nos.
It is also number in dispute that in order to companymit the dacoity the dacoits had caused injuries to the aforesaid persons, out of whom six lost their lives because of the injuries received by them.
A 7 was identified by PWs 2, 3, 4 and 6.
Both these witnesses have stated that immediately after they woke up they were assaulted and had become unconscious.
She saw 4 5 persons in the room.
On of the dacoits assaulted on the heed of her grand mother with an axe.
177 of 1988 and the original information Shambhu Dayal PW 4 has filed Criminal Appeal No.
The fact that dacoity took place in the house of Dal Chand PW 3 is number in dispute.
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
She was given a blow by an axe by one of the dacoits and, therefore, she had become unconscious.
1, 2 and 4 were also companyvicted under Section 412 IPC and sentenced to suffer five years rigorous imprisonment.
