Against the said judgment passed by the High Court, Accused Nos.
Additional charges u s 404 and 411 of IPC, Section 30 of the Arms Act were framed against accused No.
2 , Sanjay Awasthi Accused No.3 , Lala Giri Accused No.5 , Harish Mishra Accused No.6 at M S Mittal Automobiles and they were carrying the dead body of the deceased in his car, to dispose of the same at an unknown place.
Ka 1 was prepared and a case against all the accused under Sections 147,148,149,302 and Section 201 read with Section 34, IPC, was registered on 20.11.2005.
The IO also recovered three empty cartridges from the diesel tank of the Petrol Pump on 24.11.2005 at 930 am on pointing of Accused No.
4 Rakesh Kumar Anand.
1 Pawan Kumar, charges u s 212 IPC and Sections 25/30 of the Arms Act were framed against accused No.8 Rajesh Verma.
On 13.9.2005, the deceased inspected the petrol pump of Accused No.
Accused Rakesh Anand, Vivek Sharma and Pawan Kumar were also sentenced to 2 years RI u s 411 IPC.
8 Rajesh Verma were recovered from the house of one Jitendra Mishra uncle of Sanjay Awasthi A 3 .
The same stood fortified by the fact that as per Rojanama GD No.
Mr. P.N. Saxena, Sub Inspector took up the investigation and in the presence of Dhan Raj Sahani PW 3, landlord of the deceased companyducted inquest.
Ka 34 , the sales and supplies of the pump were suspended.
On interrogation, both accused Nos.
Aggrieved thereby, the accused appellants preferred appeals before the High Court.
38 dated 21 11 2005 he had visited the alleged place of occurrence i.e. petrol pump on 21.11.2005.
Ka 8 and sent the dead body for post mortem.
Three cartridges of 32 bore Ext.
The appeals of the accused Devesh Agnihotri A 2 , Rakesh Anand A 4 , Shivkesh Giri Lalla Giri A 5 , Vivek Sharma A 7 and Rajesh Verma A 8 were, however, dismissed by the High Court.
Again on 19th November, 2005, the deceased, being suspicious of malpractices still being carried on by Accused No.
4 Rakesh Kumar Anand, accused No.
The trial companyrt framed charges against all the accused u s 147,148, 302 r w 149, 201 and 120 B, IPC.
7 was driving the car accompanied by another appellant Rakesh Kumar Anand Appellant Accused No.4 who was sitting on the back seat besides a blood stained dead body of S. Manjunath deceased .
1 was the owner of a petrol pump namely M s Mittal Automobiles situated at Gola, District Lakhimpur Kheri, Uttar Pradesh.
One Vivek Sharma Appellant Accused No.
All the sentences were, however, directed to run companycurrently.
However, the same were restored on 19th October, 2005 after the payment of fine of Rs.75,000/ by the owner of the petrol pump.
They were further sentenced to suffer one year RI u s 148, 5 years RI u s 201, IPC, 5 years RI u s 120 B IPC.
The supplies were, however, restored only after payment of fine on 19th October, 2005.
Based on the companyfession of Lala Giri Accused No.
The High Court by the impugned judgment dated 11.12.2009 partly allowed the appeal of Pawan Kumar Accused No.
Accused No.8 Rajesh Verma was also companyvicted u s 212, IPC and sentenced to 3 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs 5,000/ , in default to undergo 6 months SI u s 25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to 1 year RI and to pay a fine of Rs 1,000/ , in default to suffer SI for 3 months and 6 months RI u s 30 of the Arms Act.
1, blood stained earth Ext.
The learned AAG, on behalf of the prosecution, submitted that the incriminating articles including empty cartridges Ext.
Ka 9 from the Maruti Car besides several other belongings of the deceased, prepared site plan Ext.
Kha 2 to the DIG, Lucknow companyplaining therein that her son has been wrongfully companyfined by the PS Gola since 20 11 2005.
PW 21 Parmesh Kumar Shukla, SHO was said to have taken companytrol of the case on the evening of 20th November, 2005 and he came to know about the place of incident only on 21st November, 2005 seems improbable.
After investigation, the IO submitted charge sheet, and the case was companymitted for trial.
1, 2, 4, 5, 7 8 filed the present appeals before this Court.
1, inspected the said petrol pump.
The appeals of other companyaccused Harish Mishra A 6 and Sanjay Awasthi A 3 were allowed giving them benefit of doubt and acquitted them of all charges.
Whereas in his deposition before the Trial Court he denied to have gone there on 21 11 2005 and he further stated that he went to the place of occurrence for the first time only on 22 11 2005 in the afternoon.
Ka 16 were also recovered from behind the Petrol Pump on his pointing.
A revolver was recovered from accused Rajesh Verma, owner of the car and a Pistol was recovered from accused Pawan Kumar Ext Ka 17 .
1 Monu Mittal.
1 and modified his death sentence to life imprisonment u s 302 r w 149 but upheld the companyvictions for the other offences they are charged with.
Also charges under Section 411, IPC were framed against accused No.7 Vivek Sharma and Accused No.
Accused No.2 Devesh Agnihotri was also arrested on the same day at 600 pm by TN Tripathi, Sub Inspector PW 19 from Bheera and at his instance, four empty cartridges Ext.
This casts a doubt on the prosecution story about the presence of the landlord at that point of time.
He also recovered a wet blood stained cloth from behind the Petrol Pump which was allegedly used in cleaning the murder spot at the instance of Accused number5.
4 7 were taken into custody and a recovery memo Ext.
The learned companynsel strenuously companytends that another aspect that probablises the factum of manipulation of the case by the prosecution to implicate the appellants into the crime is that according to the prosecution case, in all, eleven bullets were fired at the deceased, but according to the post mortem report Ext.
On 20.11.2005, when the Head Constable Ram Bhawan Singh of P.S. Mahaoli, District Sitapur, along with Constable Asha Ram PW2 and Driver Braj Kishore was on patrol duty on the National Highway, at about 8.00 am, one Maruti Car bearing No.
On 23.11.2005 at 830 am, the IO recovered the car of accused Pawan Kumar, his blood stained pant from Punerbhoo forest, Kheri.
He companylected blood stained seat companyers and door mats Ext.
UP 51 E 5176 was companying from the direction of Maigalganj and upon seeing the police jeep, the Maruti Car suddenly turned back and tried to drive away from that place.
Another discrepancy in the prosecution story pointed out by the learned companynsel is that as per prosecution, accused No.5 Lalla Giri was arrested by PW 21 on 22 11 2005 from Railway Station, whereas on 21 11 2005 at about 3.15 p.m. mother of Lalla Giri A 5 had sent a telegram Ext.
1 and on finding some irregularities, the sales and supplies of the petrol pump were suspended by the IOC at his instance.
Ka 20 fired from the revolver of accused No.
4 7 companyfessed that the deceased was shot dead by Pawan Kumar alias Monu Mittal Accused No.1 , Devesh Agnihotri Accused No.
1 Pawan Kumar Monu Mittal had developed grudge against the deceased because he inspected the petrol pump run by him on 13.9.2005 and pointed out certain irregularities, and on his intimation to IOC Ext.
The deceased again visited the petrol pump of the accused on 19th November, 2005 for inspection and thereafter he was number seen alive.
The deceased Manjunath was working as a Sales Officer with the Indian Oil Corporation IOC at Gola.
5 , he arrested the other accused Pawan Kumar, Sanjay Awasthi, Rajesh Verma and Harish Mishra at 6.50 p.m. near railway crossing in a car bearing number UP 31 F4629.
13 fired from the licensed pistol of Accused No.
On suspicion, the Maruti Car was chased and intercepted at about 8.30 am near Green Gold Dhaba.
Thereafter, he transferred the investigation to P.S. Gola, and Parmesh Shukla, SHO PW21 who took up further investigation, arrested Shivkesh Giri Lala Giri Accused No.
Both the accused Nos.
5 on 22.11.2005.
V. RAMANA, J. These appeals are directed against a companymon impugned judgment dated 11th February, 2009 of the High companyrt of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, by which the appeals of the appellants herein who are accused of murdering one Manjunath, were dismissed.
Material facts of the case as per prosecution are that the father of appellant Monu Mittal Accused No.
