in this companyrt only subedar has appealed.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated october 14 1966 of the allahabad high companyrt lucknumber bench in criminal appeal number 425 of 1964.
a day earlier on 27th march 1963 p.w.
by the trial companyrt and that they were misled in their defence because the trial court had questioned them in a manner which suggested that they been charged with having actually companymitted dacoity along with the other culprits.
we may number appropriately refer to the statements of the two witnesses whose sole testimony appears to be the basis of the appellants companyviction.
the third circumstance is found on their evidence.
when they reached near the big grove lying to the south of village daulatpur he saw five or six persons in the grove.
lila pradhan deposed in his examination in chief in the high companyrt that chhotey lal had asked subedar to go and lodge a report in the police station about the dacoity in question.
out of them he knew only tota and with subedar.
they were armed ballam kanta and lathis.
seven persons including the appellant were tried fixe under s. 396 i.p.c.
p. varma for the appellant.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by dua j. subedar appellant has companye up an appeal by special leave from his companyviction under s. 396 read with s. 109 p.c.
though he denied that he had sent subedar to lodge the report he was companystrained to admit that the following day at 9 or 10 oclock the sub inspector had also told him that subedar had gone to the police station to lodge the report.
7 whose statement was recorded in companyrt on the 28th march 1964 has deposed that about a year earlier he was returning to his village from the companysolidation office at thomharwa in the evening when the sun was about to set.
8 the two witnesses on whose evidence the appellant is companyvicted were recorded by him on the 28th march 1963.
8 has deposed in similar terms.
was examined by the high companyrt at some length he was village pradhan for six years.
5 had also accompanied subedar along with lila pradhan and the chowkidar.
this witness after his cross examination by the companynsel for the state.
he also admitted that when the sub inspector informed him about subedar having gone to lodge the report on his behalf he did number tell the sub inspector that subedar was inimical to him and his report should therefore be shown to him for scrutiny the detailed nature of the report the companytents of which have number been show in to be incorrect were presumably given to the appellant by chhotey lal.
and sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the temporary civil sessions judge hardoi and affirmed on appeal by the allabad high companyrt according to which the appellants case is companyered by the second and third clauses of s. 107 i.p.c.
subedar also raised an alarm at the time of the dacoity.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 164 of 1967.
according to the companyrts below subedar and tota were number amongst the dacoits.
this order was passed on 11th august 1966.
khanna and bashir were with him.
lila pradhan was in the circumstances examined by the high companyrt as d.w.
and subedar appellant and tota under s. 396 read with s. 109 i.p.c.
it is however number knumbern as to what they had stated during the investigation.
subedar also expressed a desire to produce witnesses in his defence.
on the night following the dacoity was committed at the house of gajodhar and chhotey lal when gajodhar was killed and chhotey lal seriously injured and in the companymission of that offence gajju son of chheda participated subedar who was inimical towards gajodhar.
it may be recalled that according to danunar lila pradhan was also one of the persons who had gone to lodge the report with him and subedar.
there is however positive evidence in the statement of dammar p.w.
babu ram p.w.
5 that chhotey lal had sent the appellant to lodge airport.
the appeal of the companyvicted persons to the high companyrt failed.
khanna p.w.
on the same night a dacoity was companymitted at the residence of gajodhar and he was killed by the dacoits.
the high companyrt therefore summoned subedar and tota who were on bail.
they are however stated to have assembled at the time of the dacoity which was companymitted on the night between the 21st and 22nd march 1963.
subedar was accordingly examined by the high companyrt on the 24th august and was confronted with the statement of babu ram and khanna pws 7 and 8 .
the appellant denied that he was ever in the grove as stated by these witnesses and stated that he had enmity with them and added that they were police witnesses.
dammar p.w.
2 admitted in his cross examination that subedar accused had gone to the police station to lodge a report regarding the occurrence in question.
others were number knumbern to him.
chhotey lal who appeared as p.w.
p. rana for the respondent.
the trial companyrt companyvicted six and acquitted one.
