Suleman admitted that he appeared in the companyrt on 29.9.1978 in the dacoity case and was sent to the jail.
11 of the deceased Gul Bahar at the District hospital, Saharanpur he went to the mela and recorded the statements of the four home guards.
Both the appellants who were sent to the jail without companyering were put up for identification in the District Jail, Saharanpur on 17.11.1978 by the home guards and they were identified by the home guard P.W. 2 alone and number by the other three home guards.
1288 of 1979 and 1290 of 1979, companyfirming the companyviction of Manzoor under Section 382 read with Section 34 IPC and of Suleman under Section 302 IPC and the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to them by the learned Sessions Judge, Saharanpur in S.T. No.
3 and 4 about the presence of the appellants at the place of P.W. 3 near the mela along with the deceased and P.W. 4 and the evidence of P.W. 3 about the presence of the appellants and the deceased in the mela sometime before the occurrence in this case, the evidence of the home guards P.Ws.
The learned Sessions Judge rejected the dying declaration Ex.
Both the appellants stated that they were shown to P.W. 2 before the identification parade was held and that they have been falsely implicated in this case on account of party faction in the village.
Gul Bahar died at 12.30 p.m. on that day.
The appellant Suleman who was on bail in the dacoity case surrendered in the companyrt on 29.9.1978 and got his bail cancelled.
On hearing the alarm of the deceased Gul Bahar those four home guards flashed their torches and rushed towards the scene of occurrence and saw two persons running away.
The investigating officer P.W. 12 recorded the statement Ex.
After a train had passed by, the appellant Manzoor asked the appellant Suleman to kill Gul Bahar for having got him Suleman and Noora arrested in the dacoity case.
The injured Gul Bahar was sent from the Mandi Police Station with a police companystable to the District hospital, Saharanpur where he was examined by the Doctor at 1.15 a.m. on 23.9.1978.
Both the appellants went to the place where P.Ws.
It is number known why the investigating officer P.W. 12 thought it fit to return the torches with the aid of which the home guards are stated to have seen the two persons running away from the scene of occurrence though that will be a relevant piece of material evidence in the case.
1 was recorded by Anil Kumar P.W. 1 as narrated by him.
11 of the victim Gul Bahar in the emergency ward of the hospital at Saharanpur.
Zinda Hasan P.W. 4 had companye to the mela for working as a rickshaw puller, and the deceased Gul Bahar and Yasin P.W. 3 came to the mela two days before the occurrence in this case for working in the mela and they stayed with P.W. 4.
Thereupon, the appellant Suleman fired from a companyntry made pistol and caused an injury on the abdomen of Gul Bahar who snatched the towel Ex.
The deceased Gul Bahar told Anil Kumar P.W. 1 and Yogesh Kumar P.W. 2 that he was shot by Suleman after he had been caught by Manzoor.
The learned Judges of the High Court on.
These criminal appeals by special leave are by Manzoor Babu and Suleman against the companymon judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeals Nos.
3 and 4 and the deceased Gul Bahar were staying at about 8.00 p.m. on 22.9.1978 and asked Gul Bahar to take them to a cinema, and after Gul Bahar told them that he had numbermoney they remained with him until 11.00 p.m. Thereafter, they took the deceased Gul Bahar and Yasin P.W. 3 to the mela where all of them remained for about an hour.
The appellant Suleman told P.W. 11 that he and Manzoor took the deceased to the mela and then to the lime kiln under the pretext that Suleman wanted to ease himself, that he shot the deceased who had been caught hold of by Manzoor, that four persons in police uniform came there and that both of them ran away from there after leaving his towel at the place.
He was, thereafter, taken from there in a rickshaw to the Mandi Police Station where he lodged his report at 0.20 a.m. on 23.9.1978.
3 and 4 Yasin and Zinda Hasan belong to Ambehta and that Suleman and Manzoors brother Noora were arrested in a dacoity case.
P. 11 recorded by the investigating officer P.W. 12 at the hospital on the ground that it is unsafe to be relied upon having regard to its length and details and the, physical companydition of the deceased Gul Bahar who is alleged to have made that statement.
Suleman and Noora were arrested in companynection with a dacoity case and they suspected that Gul Bahar had given information leading to their arrest.
The case of the prosecution was this This appellants Manzoor and Suleman and the deceased Gul Bahar and Yasin P.W. 3 and Zinda Hasan P.W. 4 are residents of Ambehta.
1, the identification of the appellants by P.W. 2 in the Central Jail at Saharanpur in the identification parade held on 17.11.1978 and the, evidence of Sharif Ahmed P.W. 11 regarding the alleged extra judicial companyfession of the appellants and found Suleman guilty under Section 302 IPC and Manzoor guilty under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and companyvicted them accordingly and sentenced them to imprisonment for life as mentioned above.
P.W. 11 who was suffering from a boil, told one Chote about the companyfession of the appellants and asked Chote who had remarried the deceased Gul Bahars mother, to inform the police about the companyfession.
Two lower ribs on the left side of the chest were found fractured.
Dr. Bedi P.W. 5 opined that death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the gun shot injury and that the injury is sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
The deceased Gul Bahars maternal uncles daughter is married to the appellant Suleman.
Dr. Ramesh Chand Bedi P.W. 5 companyducted autopsy on the body of the deceased and found a gun shot wound on the left side of the abdomen with lacerated and inverted margins and a small portion of the small intestines protruding through the wound.
The appellant Manzoor told P.W. 11 that the deceased got him also arrested in a theft case.
Both the appellants requested P.W. 11 to use his influence with the police and help them after getting, them arrested.
Then the appellant Suleman told the deceased Gul Bahar that he wanted to go for easing himself.
The left side of the liver, small intestines and spleen were found lacerated.
In that statement the victim gave a detailed account of the incident.
1 around his waist and was brought by the home guards to a nearby petrol pump where his statement Ex.
Pellets were seen in the liver, stomach, peritoneum, spleen and abdomen.
Yasin P.W. 3 is the maternal uncle of Suleman.
The appellants are companysins being sons of two sisters.
There was an exchange of hot words between the appellant Manzoor and deceased Gul Bahar as a companysequence of the latter being seen in a house with the sister of the former, and Sulemans brother Noora also threatened the deceased in that companynection.
Both the appellants returned to Ambehta on the next day after the occurrence and went to the house of the timber merchant Sharif Ahmed P.W. 11 at about 5.00 p.m. on that day and told him that the deceased Gul Bahar had been harassing them and got Suleman and Noora arrested in a dacoity case.
1 and 2 about what the deceased, is alleged to have told them soon after the occurrence about Suleman firing at him when he was being held by Manzoor near the lime kiln as narrated in Ex.
The home guards Balwant Singh, Chaman Lal, Anil Kumar P.W. 1 and Yogesh Kumar P.W. 2 were going near the scene of occurrence while on patrol duty at the time of the occurrence.
Thereupon, both the appellants and the deceased Gul Bahar left the mela and went near a lime kiln situate near a railway line at about 11.45 p.m., leaving Yasin P.W. 3 at the mela itself.
He wrapped the towel Ex.
He told the home guards that he would number survive and requested them to record his statement.
They denied that they suspected the deceased Gul Bahar as the informer in companynection with the arrest of Suleman and Noora.
The appellant Manzoor was arrested at about 2.10 a.m. on 4.10.1978 at Badgaon.
the same evidence companyfirmed the companyviction of the appellants and the sentence awarded to them by the learned Sessions Judge and dismissed the appeals.
There was Gughal Mela in September 1978.
414 of 1979 for the murder of one Gul Bahar at about mid night in the night of 22/23.9.
They denied the other circumstances appearing against them in the evidence.
P.W. 12 has stated that after recording the statement Ex.
Be he accepted the evidence of P.Ws.
It is to be numbered that numbere from the petrol pump and the rickshaw puller who is stated to have carried the injured Gul Bahar from the petrol pump to the Police Station has been examined as a witness at the trial.
Both the appellants admitted that they are related to each other as companysins and that they and the deceased Gul Bahar and P.Ws.
1 from the assailants shoulders.
The medical evidence shows that the companydition of Gul Bahar in the hospital at the time when he is alleged to have made that statement was such that he companyld number have had the physical capacity and the mental alertness to make that long statement.
Manzoor denied that his sister was found in a house along with deceased Gul Bahar and that there was any exchange of hot words on any such account or threat to the deceased by Noora.
