At that stage, the other accused, namely, Ram Prakash came there with a Barchi in his hand and joined the altercation which was going on, in support of Dharam Raj.
The High Court numbericed that there were different versions regarding the weapons used.
Inderjit Singh went to the police station, Muskara and got a report KA 3 written by one K.A. Siddiqui and handed it over to the Head Constable PW 7 on the basis of that report, PW 7 registered the case.
Whereas, P.W.5 mentioned in the I.R. that the deceased was attacked by barchi, in the Panchayatnama inquest report prepared by the I.O. P.W.8 , it was mentioned that the injuries were caused by bhala and lathi.
According to the prosecution, when the deceased was at the house of Shivanandan PW 1 to enquire about the cultivation of his land, the accused Dharam Raj came there.
He companylected blood stained earth etc.,
He prepared Panchayatnama KA 6 and sent the dead body through the companystables to the mortuary for the postmortem examination.
16 which is an abrasion, are punctured wounds on various parts of the body, including vital parts.
Shivanandan received an injury on his hand while he was making efforts to save the deceased.
Thereafter, both the accused went on attacking the deceased with bhala and barchi.
In the opinion of PW 2, the death occurred due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of injuries.
Injury Nos.
The deceased questioned the accused Dharam Raj about number payment of the money which he spent in companynection with the murder case in which both of them were involved.
at the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan KA 11 .
Thereafter, the Sub Inspector of Police PW 8 after recording the statement of the Head Constable at the police station, went to the place of occurrence.
The High Court observed that there was evidence on record that lathi was number used and the injuries were number the result of the lathi blows.
J U D G M E N T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2003 ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. Crl.
The High Court acquitted the accused of the offence with which they were charged and allowed the appeal.
He also found perforation of liver and spleen.
The direct witnesses are Shivanandan PW1 , Smt.
On internal examination, the doctor found that the brain membranes were companygested, the left and right lung were punctured and the heart and its membranes were punctured at four places.
1 to 4 and 6 were incised wounds which were found on the occipital region and on the face and head.
When Dharam Raj replied that he had numbermoney and he was number going to pay anything, there was verbal duel between them.
P.W. 8 asserted that the reference in KA 6 to bhala and lathi was on the basis of statements made by the witnesses.
2290 of 1993 Leave granted.
PW 2, who companyducted the postmortem examination found as many as 19 ante mortem injuries.
The remaining, excepting injury No.
On the alarm raised by those who gathered there, the accused fled from the scene.
That appeal was filed by the accused respondents herein against the companyviction recorded against them under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and the life sentence imposed.
The informant Inderjit Singh, who is the son of the deceased, having heard the shouts from the house of Shivanandan PW 1 rushed there and saw the attack.
The High Court observed that the prosecution was number able to prove the case against the accused by companyent, companysistent and reliable evidence.
In this regard, the eye witnesses account does number tally with what was stated in the F.I.R. and the Panchayatnama KA 6 attested among others by P.Ws.
They were also charged under Section 323 read with Section 34 I.P.C. for causing simple hurt to Shivanandan but they were acquitted of that charge by the Sessions Court itself.
He was having the weapon Bhala in his hand.
Jaggi PW4 , the mistress of PW 1 and Inderjit Singh PW5 .
2290 of 1993 Venkatarama Reddi, J. L.P. Crl.
These appeals by special leave, one filed by the informant W. 5 and the other by the State of U.P. arise out of the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No.
The two accused respondents were charged for murdering one Harnath Singh of the same village on 8.12.1979 at about 11.30 a.m. at the house of Shivanandan P.W. 1 .
1668 of 1980.
Suddenly, Ram Prakash inflicted an injury on the chest of the deceased with barchi, wielding it like a lathi.
Then, he struck the head of the deceased with the sharp portion of barchi, as a result of which the deceased fell down.
