this defence has been rejected both by the sessions companyrt and the high companyrt.
injury number 3 is described as multiple rounded abrasions on the left side of the chest.
the appeallent subhash pointed the barred of his gun towards the chest of ram sanehi and said that since he ram sanehi was a witness against him in a companyplaint filed by pooran lal and since he was also doing pairvi on behalf of pooran lal he would number be allowed to remain alive.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 27 11 74 of the allahabad high companyrt in criminal appeal number 2646/73 and referred number 95/73.
ka 11.
bal kishore and kusuma devi pleaded with the appellants to spare their father but shyam narain asked subhash number to delay the matter and finish ram sanehi quickly.
the appellants denied the charge that they had committed the murder of ram sanehi and stated that they were involved in the case due to enmity.
subhash thereupon fired three shots from his double barrelled gun the last of which misfired.
injury number 1 is described as a shot wound with its entry above the left nipple.
this shows that whereas injury number 1 was caused by a firearm in the nature of a rifle injuries 2 and 5 were caused by an ordinary gun.
2 and 5 were caused by pellets.
the evidence of dr.
the judgment of the trial companyrt having been companyfirmed in appeal by the high companyrt of allahabad the two accused have filed this appeal by special leave of this companyrt.
the appellant shyam narain was armed with a lathi.
frank anthony e.c.
the case of the prosecution is briefly as follows on the morning of june 9 1972 the deceased ram sanehi had gone to his field along with his son bal kishore and his daughter kusuma devi for eating kharbuzas.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 420 of 1974.
while they were returning from the field at about 9 a.m. the appellants who were lying in wait near a culvert suddenly accosted ram sanehi.
agarwala and a. t. m. sampath for the appellants.
what bal kishore told mangali prasad immediately after the incident seems more probable because one virendrapal had contested that election and the appellant subhash had defeated him.
the appellant shyam narain was arrested at about 2 40 p.m. on the same day under section 122 of the railway act for crossing the railines at fatehgarh.
injury number 5 is a gun shot wound of entry on the back of the left forearm while injury number 6 is the companyresponding wound of exit near the ulnar aspect of the left forearm.
in all he found 7 injuries on the dead body out of which injuries 1 3 and 7 injuries 2 and 4 and injuries 5 and 6 are interconnected.
subhash was sentenced to death and shyam narain to imprisonment for life.
p. rana for the respondent.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by chandrachud j. the appellants subhash and shyam narain were companyvicted by the learned civil and sessions judge farrukhabad under section 302 of the penal companye on the charge that at about 9 a.m. on june 9 1972 they committed the murder of one ram sanehi.
